The Beginning Of The End
The Beginning Of The End By Michael T. Snyder - Kindle Version

The Prepper's Blueprint

Don't Buy Survival Food Until You Read This - If you stockpile the wrong foods, you could be setting your family up to starve. It sounds harsh, but the truth is too many people with good intentions are making critical mistakes with their food stockpiles. Watch this video now >>
The End of Obama? Approaching Obama scandal could change the White House Administration and our country overnight... Click Here
Gold Buying Guide: Golden Eagle Coins

Archives

The Mystery Of The Shemitah

Top 1% Has 65 Times More Wealth Than The Bottom Half And The Global Elite Like It That Way

85 Richest People - Photo by OxfamDid you know that the 85 richest people in the world have about as much wealth as the poorest 50% of the entire global population does?  In other words, 85 extremely wealthy individuals have about as much wealth as the poorest 3,500,000,000 do.  This shocking statistic comes from a new report on global poverty by Oxfam.  And actually Oxfam's report probably significantly underestimates the true scope of the problem, because Oxfam relies on publicly reported numbers.  At the very top of the food chain, the global elite are masters at hiding their wealth.  In fact, as I have written about previously, the global elite have approximately 32 trillion dollars (that we know about) stashed in offshore banks around the world.  That would be about enough to pay off the entire U.S. national debt and buy every good and service produced in the United States for an entire year.  These elitists live on an entirely different planet than the rest of us do.  In fact, according to Oxfam, the richest one percent of the global population has 65 times more wealth than the bottom half of the global population combined.

There is certainly nothing wrong with making money.  In fact, the founders of the United States intended for this nation to be a place where free markets thrived and where everyone could pursue their dreams.  Unfortunately, this country (along with the rest of the world) has moved very much in the opposite direction.  Today, we have a debt-based global financial system which is dominated by gigantic predator corporations and big banks.  Working together with national governments, these corporations and banks have constructed a system that I like to call "Corporatism" in which the percentage of all global wealth that is being funneled to the very top of the pyramid steadily grows over time.

The Founding Fathers were very correct to be very suspicious of large concentrations of power.  In the early days of the United States, the federal government was very small and the size and scope of corporations was greatly limited.  Our nation thrived and a huge middle class blossomed.

Sadly, over the past several decades the pendulum has completely swung in the other direction.  Today, our society is completely and totally dominated by big banks, big corporations and big government.

And of course this is also happening in virtually every other nation on the face of the planet.  The global elite have rigged the game to send just about all of the rewards their way, and it is working.  The following are facts taken directly from Oxfam's latest report...

•Almost half of the world’s wealth is now owned by just one percent of the population.

•The wealth of the one percent richest people in the world amounts to $110 trillion. That’s 65 times the total wealth of the bottom half of the world’s population.

•The bottom half of the world’s population owns the same as the richest 85 people in the world.

•Seven out of ten people live in countries where economic inequality has increased in the last 30 years.

•The richest one percent increased their share of income in 24 out of 26 countries for which we have data between 1980 and 2012.

•In the US, the wealthiest one percent captured 95 percent of post-financial crisis growth since 2009, while the bottom 90 percent became poorer.

Starting on Wednesday, several thousand members of the global elite will gather for the World Economic Forum meetings in Davos, Switzerland.  The following is how USA Today described this conference.

For several days at the end of January, presidents, prime ministers, monarchs and corporate titans jostle with actors, rock stars and major influencers for top billing at the annual meeting of the World Economic Forum. The confab takes place in the Alpine village of Davos, about 90 miles southeast of Zurich, and for a brief spell each year the pristine ski resort half-sheds its Graubünden roots and becomes a ground zero for the political and business elite.

Unless you are independently wealthy, you can forget about going to this conference.  A ticket to Davos is going to cost you about $30,000, and that is on top of the $55,000 that it costs to join the organization.

Needless to say, it is an organization of the elite, by the elite and for the elite.

This year, the theme of the meeting is "The Reshaping of the World: Consequences for Society, Politics and Business".  And the founder of the World Economic Forum says that the time has come to press the "reset" button for the global economy...

It's time to press the "reset" button on the world, the founder of the World Economic Forum said Wednesday, addressing media ahead of the WEF's much ballyhooed annual meeting in Davos-Klosters, Switzerland, that gets underway in a week's time.

"The world is complex, it's fast-moving, it's interconnected, and we in Davos want to provide a mirror to the world as it is. It is not a meeting devoted to one set of issues. It's a meeting that address the complexity of our world," said Klaus Schwab, the WEF's founder and executive chairman.

At first glance, that sounds pretty good.

Personally, I would love to hit a "reset" button for the global economy.

But what the elite mean by "reset" is much different from what most of the rest of us would mean.

The following is an excerpt from the executive summary for the agenda for the 2014 World Economic Forum...

"At an international level, the formal architecture for global governance was not designed for the interdisciplinary challenges and collective action problems of today. As a result, international cooperation has yet to fully enter the information age and capture its associated productivity gains."

For the global elite, the answers to our problems always involve more centralization and more "global governance".  In other words, the answers to our problems always involve giving them more control and more power.

The elite never actually want the pendulum to swing back in the direction of the "little guy".  The elite are generally pleased with how the game is being played because they are winning.

Most people don't even realize that they are participants in a debt-based neo-feudalist system in which money is being used as a form of social control.

As I have written about previously, there is about 190 trillion dollars of debt in the world, but global GDP is only about 70 trillion dollars.

There is no way that all of this debt could ever be paid off at one time.  It is mathematically impossible.  Over time, all of this debt transfers the wealth of the planet away from us and to the global elite.  If this game was allowed to go on long enough, eventually they would have nearly all of it.

And some would argue that we are already getting close to that point.  A study by the World Institute for Development Economics Research discovered that the bottom half of the global population only owns approximately 1 percent of all wealth, and at this point about a billion people throughout the world go to bed hungry every night.

This is one of the reasons why I am so adamant about the fact that the Federal Reserve needs to be shut down.  It is at the very heart of the debt-based system that we have in the United States, and over the past 100 years it has brought us to the brink of economic Armageddon.

Sadly, most Americans do not understand any of these things.  They just assume that the debt-fueled prosperity that we have been enjoying will be able to go on indefinitely.

So is there any hope for the "little guy"?

Well, you could try to win the one billion dollar NCAA tournament bracket contest that Warren Buffett is backing.

Or you could go out and try to win the lottery or try to date a famous professional athlete.

But the odds of any of those things actually happening are so low that they aren't even worth mentioning.

Personally, I would rather spend my time trying to wake people up and help them understand how our global system really works.

I believe that a "great awakening" is coming.

I believe that millions of people are going to start breaking out of the "matrix of control" that has such a tight grip on their lives and are going to start thinking for themselves.

I believe that as the darkness gets even darker that the light is going to get even brighter.  I believe that we are going to see "renewal" on a whole bunch of different levels.

Yes, a great economic collapse is coming.

Yes, there is going to be a tremendous amount of pain.

But it won't all be bad news.

The times ahead are going to be full of adventure and excitement for those who are willing to embrace it.

So what do you think about what is coming in the years ahead?  Please feel free to share your thoughts by posting a comment below...

85 Richest People - Photo by Oxfam

Be Sociable, Share!
  • Kim

    Wealth=earth’s natural resources. Or access to them. The earth was given for all to enjoy, not just a few.

    Yep, collapse is certainly coming and a great equalizing along with it.

    • RICHARD

      And the sad part about it, is after it collapses they will own even more.

      • Rodster

        That is correct. In fact that’s what they are working on at the 2014 Davos meeting. One of the highlights of the meeting is global governance along with a global currency.

      • davidmpark

        Got a feeling that they won’t be able to. Even if they have a secret combination, or living out of yachts; they’re going to get smacked by it one way or another.

        When Rome fell, there were barbarians to sack the empire. Sure, many were on the Roman’s payroll at the time. But the Huns changed everything.

        Wonder where the Huns will come from this time?

      • Hammerstrike

        Nope, rather when disaster strikes, those who keep their wealth secure will own it.

    • k

      Part natural resources and part currency. Todays currency is printed out of thin air and doesnt depend on natural resources.

    • Kent Harris

      Not necessarily, when people talk about world governance it means a lot of people will need to be eradicated. They view most people as useless feeders. Man tends to move toward evil because it is the most appealing.

      • DownWithLibs

        And it’s easier!

      • Hammerstrike

        Not at all, they are the biggest useless eaters of all.

        They are no elite, if they would all suddenly drop dead, the World economy would do better.
        The 190 trillions dollars in debt is from the producers to the looters.

    • John Pryce

      What moron taught you that wealth = natural resources?
      I’ve RARELY seen so much bull in one sentence before.

      • Kim

        I’m sorry, didn’t mean to offend u. I take full credit for that one. Wasn’t well thought out. I was meaning to say those who own oil production assets (not fracking, but conventional oil production) or large amounts of gold, silver, large corporate farming operations or corporations that own and produce other raw materials used in building or manufacturing everyday items that we all need or want. I am aware money is made from intangible things as well, ie stocks, internet companies, Ponzi schemes and other shady financial dealings. But to me, real wealth comes from owning or having direct access to real resources, that are sold at high prices.

        • John Pryce

          …. You actually missed the point of my comment.

          If wealth = natural resources, how did Bill Gates get rich? Why are both Japan and South Korea many times wealthier than any African country, or for that matter Canada?

          • Kim

            I realize there is more than one way to get rich. I misspoke. My apologies.

          • Anonymous

            May God bless you.

            Thank you for your comments and for participating in the discussion.

        • John Pryce

          Wealth is the accumulation of the unspent fruits of one’s labor. It doesn’t have to be money – currency is merely the most ‘liquid’ tradeable commodity – it can be in any number of forms, including firearms and ammunition, precious metals, land, or even something like valuable skills.
          Whats more, ‘natural resources’ REQUIRE some labor to make them wealth. And the continued advance of technology turns previously useless dirt and rock into ‘natural resources; they always existed, but now we had a use for them. Petroleum had little practical value until someone figured out how to extract kerosene (which became a major competitor to, and eventually displaced entirely, whale oil) from it. Until then, it was just a useless polluting hazard that farmers PRAYED they wouldn’t suddenly strike on their land.
          Aluminum didn’t have all that much practical value except for it’s rarity until someone tried it in aircraft fuselages. Napoleon Bonaparte once showed off his wealth with aluminum cutlery and dishes, for example.
          Even iron had little practical value until after the North African tin trade collapsed, because bronze is naturally a harder material and was considered superior for weapons and tools at the time, and the bronze alloy they were using required tin.

          • Kim

            Thank you. I appreciate learning all I can from people. Excellent post.

          • John Pryce

            …. Sorry I unloaded on you. Your original post made me mistake you for a Marxist ideologue. I’m glad you have more substance than that.

          • Kim

            It’s ok. :-))).

          • Drud

            I wanted to throw in my 2 cents on this. I think the line is between tangible/intrinsic value and financial value (that which only has value because it is agreed upon by society at large: currency, stck certificates, hell, baseball cards, etc). The real involves, not natural resources per se, but work/energy and time. In engineering terms, energy is the ability to do work and work is simply energy applied (over time). The simplest way I have to express it is this way: what is the difference between gravel and rocks. The answer is simple: effort. Someone gathered or pulverized and then sorted gravel, where rocks are simply a “:natural resource.” The key to petroleum (and I am speaking simply of the last 100 years or so) is that it is incredibly energy dense and its energy is remarkably easy to extract. This simple fact is what has led to a century of technological advancement. A barrel of oil can do the same of work as 1 man doing 50 hours or so of labor. In this country alone, we burn 6.2 BILLION barrels per day. Energy is real, time is th emost valuable commodity, and money is simply a measuring stick for both. The true problem is money can only work if everyone sticks to the inherent agreement that gives money value. The way thing really work, is that those that control the money supply have too much temptation to cheat the system, thereby inflating the money supply and ultimately making it worthless. This has happened again and again throughout history, we are simply coming up on the end of another cycle.

          • John Pryce

            Firstly, your figures are off. We burn approximately 7 billion barrels per YEAR, not per day.
            Secondly, you are correct to a certain extent, but what you are describing is a weakness not of currency in general but of fiat currencies. Inflation of the kind you are describing can only happen in any significant amount when there is a fiat currency. The so-called “free banking/currency” system of banks issuing competing deposit certificates to be used as currency, which has potential weaknesses of its own, at least has the ultimate backstop of people being able to withdraw their deposits and switch currency holdings if they come to believe that their banker is behaving irresponsibly with their deposits.
            Thirdly, you are mistaken with regards to the definition of value. You aren’t COMPLETELY wrong, but you are conflating two different types of value and they need to be separated. Value, as a primary, is INDIVIDUAL, and in the eye of the beholder and his judgment besides. TRADE goods are agreed as valuable only because they are commonly valuable, but value as such is individual.
            Fourthly, inflationary policies as pursued by governments under fiat currencies are justified on the Keynesian premise that they can actually help the economy, but in reality are less schemes of the rich and more vote-buying and cost-defraying schemes by politicians.
            And finally, the cycle you describe is not an inevitable result of anything except the acceptance of a philosophy that still contains irrational premises. This is the reason why I am an advocate of the Austrian School of economics; it leaves no room in the economy for intervention by the state, including in the creation and issuance of currency.

            Don’t let the Marxists confuse you about the distinction between the power of money and the power of the gun; Marxism preaches that they are one and the same, whereas the truth is that a world of difference lies between them.

          • Anonymous

            “Time is the most valuable commodity….”

            Agree.

            What is so sad is that there are some working class people that have worked so hard they have needed surgeries as a result of hard work. Also, many working class have little to no time for family, friends, hobbies, or vacation. Yet, look at what the working class are paid for their time and their backs. I would say I wonder how those that don’t pay living wages sleep at night, but since there are so many ads for sleep aids nowadays that answers my question. Also, many hearts have waxed cold, so there is no conscience to keep those cold hearts awake at night.

  • James

    Thank you for covering this. Yes the system is very rigged. Having been carjacked in the country of Kenya I saw what poverty drives people to do. I was in a wealthy area of Kenya near Westgate when I was carjacked in the early evening. I fear that our country is getting closer to being like that where even the rich have to be boarded up in order to survive and always looking over their shoulders. We are a nations of servants with a few serfs. Now don’t worry I’m not turning into Gary2 but the income inequality is a problem because what we have is not capitalism. If we did there would be a lot less poor people. I do however appreciate that the left wing brings up the fact that we are in a permanent service sector economy with low wages this seems to be the new normal. Jesus is truly on his way back this world is getting worse. World War III could start any year.

    • Drud

      The only really issue I ever have with what Gary espouses is the fact that it can never work. The wealth that the 1% hold can never be distributed by any non-violent means. The 1% not only employ virtually all the tax lawyers, they also employ virtually all the lawmakers. There will never be any law written, let alone called to the floor for vote, that touches the wealth of the super elite.
      The other point I would like to make is this: we simply need to stop measuring wealth in money. Money is not wealth and never has been. Money is simply an agreement a social contract and a way of keeping score. One one level, real wealth is measured in energy. On another level, real wealth is measured in friendship, laughter and love. We all forget that from time to time (I certainly do); we simply need more people to remember.

      • Chive Barnes

        Hard to find much friendship, laughter and love when people struggle to pay for basic necessities and life is reduced to an endless grind of minimum wage work just to subsist.

        The average Walmart or McDonald’s worker lives a life that is not that much different from a medieval serf except for the fact that he has endless forms of electronic entertainment to keep him pacified.

        • Anonymous

          Americans are miserable. Go to almost any service worker and ask them. Few Americans are living their dream, their destiny, or their purpose. Americans are working long hours, rarely seeing their family, no time or money for vacations or hobbies, and receiving wages they can’t even pay basic bills with (some working people can’t afford food, rent, or electricity). Many Americans are living in run down, crime ridden areas because they can’t afford better, even though they work 16 hour days. The wealthy live in gated communities to make sure the poor are kept at a distance.

          No system is fair, and it never will be. The game is rigged, always has been, always will be. There have been people that work harder than any other co-worker, yet the hard worker is not paid more nor are they promoted. Instead, the lazy sloth is promoted and receives raises. That is part of the reason that people are so disappointed in Capitalism. I do not believe any “ism” or human system will ever work, and if it does it won’t be for long. Humans are simply too corrupt, greedy, selfish, and flawed, and so goes everything humans have created (like Capitalism, Socialism, Communism, etc.). The best, most decent people always seem to work harder than everyone else, yet they always seem to be more impoverished than everyone else and are rarely recognized or rewarded. Instead, it is the darkest of souls, the one that has stolen the most wealth and ideas from other, the biggest bully, and the one that puts on the best show that triumphs in this world.

          • quercus454

            Those that are really in charge and the government puppets they control like the populace struggling. When people are working endless hours, they have little inclination to do much of anything else. They don’t have time to read the paper, a book or to do endless research on the web. What news they get is pablum spewed from television. They work, take care of their families and not much else. If any free time is available they zone out in front of the TV to escape. They will never have the time to organize with like minded people and right the system. It is exactly what the powerful want.

          • Drud

            We are all attached to a poisoned host. It rally is that simple. To detach is painful and difficult, to remain is a slow death. There are no good options here.

          • Anonymous

            +100 up votes

        • Malcolm Reynolds

          The big difference is the serf was forced. No one is stopping the McDonald’s worker from bettering himself and going elsewhere for something better.
          If you strive for mediocrity, you should expect to achieve it.

          • quercus454

            So tell that to all of the unemployed and under employed STEM workers. Tell that to those that just graduated from college and are suffering better then 25% unemployment. It is easy to say improve one’s self and get a better job, but if there are no jobs, it doesn’t matter. I know lots of people who are well educated and once had good paying jobs. Some are still looking for work and a few are working at min wage or close to it. Your narrow perspective is astonishing!

          • Malcolm Reynolds

            Who said go get a job?
            Who said go get a degree?
            Who said those degrees meant automatic jobs?
            Who said a degree was worth the paper it’s printed on?

            How stupid were you to believe those people?

            good lord, you’ve been brainwashed into thinking getting a job is the only thing you can do. Go make something! Go build it yourself!
            YOUR narrow perspective alas isn’t all that surprising given your whining.

          • Malcolm Reynolds

            Utter bull. apparently I’ve upset the mod.
            Who said get a job?
            Who said get a degree?
            Who said a degree means automatic jobs forever?
            Who said a degree is worth more than the paper it’s printed on?
            How brainwashed are you that you think the only thing you can do is work for others?
            Despite what preezy stompy foot says, how about you get off your a$$ and go build it. How about you go make something yourself.
            YOUR narrow perspective is, alas, not that surprising with all that whining.

          • John Pryce

            A degree CAN be worth more than the paper it’s printed on, in the sense that the program it certifies that you successfully completed actually taught you some useful skills.
            That’s very different, however, from saying “a college degree, ANY degree, will help you in the job market”, which obviously isn’t true.
            And I call him Empty Chair.

          • Malcolm Reynolds

            Indeed.
            “Women’s Studies” and almost every other liberal arts degree listed on those “I am the 99%” websites come to mind as stark differences from the highly lucrative computer science degree.

          • Gay Veteran

            yeah, go out and compete with the big box stores

          • Anonymous

            +100 up votes.

          • Gay Veteran

            of course, there is soooooo much opportunity out there.
            must be why small business creation is so low now

          • Malcolm Reynolds

            The sum total of your response is,
            “Kick, flail, whine. I just cant do it.” And you wont. Good luck out there competing for the bottom.

          • Gay Veteran

            no, I simply recognize reality. Try it sometime

          • Malcolm Reynolds

            Indeed and your reality will likely always be the mediocrity of the bottom. loser.

          • Gay Veteran

            look again in your crystal ball, I’m a patent attorney.

          • Anonymous

            Why did you have to go and say that? This shook up my happy little snow globe. I usually agree with your comments 99% of the time. I can’t believe I agree with an attorney so often. Well, based on your comments, you must be one of the good ones. So, I’m o.k. again. Life just really surprises me sometimes. Guess this explains why I found you to be a master at debates.

          • Malcolm Reynolds

            “Guess this explains why I found you to be a master at debates.”
            BWAAHAHAHAHHAHA. Now I understand your last post to me.

          • Anonymous

            Quiet please. The adults are talking.

          • Malcolm Reynolds

            Where are they? All I see is you two rubes

          • Malcolm Reynolds

            That means utterly nothing.

            My ex girlfriend’s gay brother, who was a very good friend of mine BTW, was an architect.

            Oooh, clutch my pearls and swoon!!!

            Ya, he mainly designed parking lots and was nothing but BROKE, which is why he rented a room from her.

            Besides, you hold WAY too many doltish, whiny a** positions to be any kind of success. You don’t even understand success, so I’m gonna stick with – you’re an incredibly mediocre patent attorney.

          • Gay Veteran

            hey junior, check your crystal ball again. I’ve got a sweet condo on the 19th floor overlooking downtown Baltimore and the harbor.
            but I guess you can’t be a “success” without licking some corporate boot, eh

          • Malcolm Reynolds

            Nah.
            Yikes, licking…. You really wanna use that metaphor around me when you smoke two packs of poles a day, pervert?

          • Gay Veteran

            hey brain dead, better shine up that crystal ball, you’re on a roll

        • Anonymous

          +100 up votes.

          Raise your hand if you feel like a hamster in a wheel that works and works but never ends up anywhere. Meanwhile, there is yelling that the hamster should be running faster, and the hamster should be grateful that he is even allowed to run in the wheel to nowhere at all.

      • Hammerstrike

        No, those applying the laws are not lawmakers but in a real crisis, they will be.

    • Anonymous

      Come quickly Lord Jesus.

      • Hammerstrike

        Heaven help those who help themselves…

        • Anonymous

          Jesus helped those who could not help themselves. Jesus had mercy on the poor and told His followers to do the same.

          • Hammerstrike

            On the poor, not on the stupid.

    • El Pollo de Oro

      James: Your economic analysis is spot on. What we have in The Banana Republic of America is NOT true capitalism or free enterprise. It’s a fascist Third World economic system run by a corrupt oligarchy. And I’m sorry you came face-to-face with The Desperate People Doing Desperate Things Tax in Kenya. I’ve never been to Kenya, but I have been to Latin America and North Africa and have seen the DPDDTT in action. It’s hell, absolute hell. Many corporate bootlickers here in the BRA don’t have enough sense to tell the difference between fascism and free enterprise, but they’ll get a brutal dose of reality when the DPDDTT comes a’ knockin’. I dread the DPDDTT, and the more preppers learn about the DPDDTT, the more they prep.

  • Rodster

    “It’s a big club and you ain’t in it”
    - George Carlin

    This is why the framers of this nation warned us against central planning and central banking. You get a pyramid of wealth. The top are the few with all the dough and the rest are bottom feeders and want to keep it that way.

    • Mondobeyondo

      Can you say “Ponzi scheme”?!?

    • Mondobeyondo

      You can join the club. All you have to do, is sell your soul to the devil. The examples are too numerous to mention here.

      Needless to say… Katy Perry, Kanye West, the rapper DMX, pop singer Ke$ha,, and others have publicly stated they have done exactly that.

      Okay, back on topic…

      • Tim

        You’re absolutely right.

    • Anonymous

      Right on. Love Carlin as he was the most honest of all celebs, in my opinion. He told the truth, yet made us all laugh.

    • seth datta

      In bygone days, the bloodline of Cain (seed of satan) competed with that of Seth to survive, after Cain had killed able. In time, the ideologies of Cain became entrenched in the Kabbalah/ Talmud (not the innocent Torah) based Judaism. These were satanic Jews. Such Jews had Christ killed and had subverted Christianity a little after 0AD. This is why so many problems have arisen from this religion, for large segments of it had become compromised.

      These Jews then subverted everything they touched in the coming centuries, until they found freemasonary, which being all inclusive was a perfect marriage for them by which to conquer. Gentile freemasonary (a satanic trade guild) thus incorporated talmudism in a plot to destroy western (and eastern) civilizations, to be replaced by a one world order.

      • Gay Veteran

        bilge

      • k

        Michael,

        this guy posts anti-jewish stuff using different profile names. Permanently ban this profile/email ID.

        • Hammerstrike

          Censorship, that’ll show him!

          • k

            how does it make sense?

          • Hammerstrike

            Simple, censorship should goes to whoever asks for it!

    • Rob W

      George Carlin, one of the greatest political commentators we’ve ever known. I remember Gallagher had a good bit too, not quite as succinct, but funny… He couldn’t understand big words unless he broke them into their root words, and politics was one he did. Poly meaning many, and tics meaning blood sucking parasites.

  • K

    My friend excellent article. I agree at the 99% level. On the one thing, you see a great awakening, I do not. To me it seems for every one person who wakes up, there are many more who bury their heads even deeper in the sand. Know this I will pray you are right.

    • Kim

      I agree, K. Some of my colleagues will acknowledge some degree of economic reality, but it doesn’t apply to them –always applies to someone else. Or, they think we will somehow work our way out of this mess if we elect the right person or party. All out economic collapse is a reality they would rather not accept.

      • K

        That sounds very familiar, and that is my point. You are in Oregon, I am in N.E. TN. By miles we could not be much further apart. And yet we a meeting the same sort of people. Still I would prefer Michael is right. Thank-you so much for your reply, it really helps, when someone from a very different part of the Country replies. Bless you.

      • Jodi

        Yeah, I know one to many people that just don’t seem to think that there will ever be a economic disaster. They think the politicians in charge are going to fix it. I sure hope Michael is right that there will be a great awakening.

        • Anonymous

          I recently heard an interview in which the person being interviewed showed several figures and examples of how we are actually worse off now than at the height of The Great Depression.

          I also read an article that said the amount of people sell in their soul to Satan for fame and wealth has skyrocketed. I had no idea anyone even kept track of how many people are selling their souls to Satan.

  • Drud

    Living in a world dominated by the few elite is exhausting, watching the masses fall for the lies and blindly enjoy their daily glut of mindless entertainment is doubly so. Worst of all, I am guilty of it, as well. I drive in dreadful traffic to a job (it is a good job with a good company and I recognize how lucky I am to have it) that is ultimately a dead-end and therefore almost entirely meaningless, I have a nice home that my wife and I are almost continuously remodeling, We are comfortable, have no debt beside a hefty mortgage, we never miss a meal and never face any real hardships. Still, it is exhausting and depressing. We desperately need a great awakening, a way back to living lives instead of existing in a decadent, lazy, meaningless, always entertained, electronic-infused stupor. I will welcome the coming collapse despite the inevitable pain of breaking an addiction that is worse than any drug–a spiritual malaise that only hardship and desperation can truly cure. It will not be easy, but nothing worth doing ever is.

    • watchmanonthetower

      You appear willing to ‘pay your dues’, Drud – a spiritual cleansing and renewal in a fire sparked by an inevitable catabolic collapse of society and all the horror that comes with…
      …an impressive challenge. We were once like you; a hamster-wheel reality and a slave to the machines that demanded all of our quality time; and a slice of our soul to grease the gears, with naught but a slip of paper twice a month to prove our worth and justify our existence and validate our sweaty efforts…and, if we were lucky; perhaps an indifferent nod from the Boss as a non-binding pat on the back.
      .
      After many struggles and a generous and continuous application of faith; we survived, thrived and arrived here in our Redoubt to gird up for the coming storm.

      So will you.

      ~Watchman

    • quercus454

      So why wait for the collapse? Sell your stuff, quit your job and move to a piece of bare land. Start over and build a new life. One that isn’t dependent on regular hours and unnecessary stuff.

      • Drud

        There are several reasons, the most obvious is simply inertia. It is difficult to change and more so when there is no immediate threat. Second, my family is not all on board and I do not live for just myself. Third, and most importantly, while many can see the threats (there are many looming) none can see the future. No one knows how events will unfold. History has shown that people with the most flexibility and mobility are the ones who thrive most in crises. Therefore, I believe that psychological preparedness is tantamount. Prepare your mind, prepare your soul and the body will follow when the time comes. Mostly, i guess, my ennui can be attributed to being tired of waiting.

        • alexo

          although it may help, you don’t need to live in a isolated farm to change or be happy. Change your life and find happiness through Jesus Christ because in the end all this stuff we have is a temporary loan. It will all go away. Nature is a beautiful thing though and it can lead us to God. So if you want you can use that to get closer to God. But in the end unlike what Hollywood/media says we do need Jesus Christ. And I will say a prayer for you.

    • 1+1

      I believe you have summed it up nicely.

  • Bryce Ward

    oh please. “income inequality” is such a non issue. It’s code for “he has more than I do and he’s not sharing!!! WAAAAAAAH!!!” It’s playing on peoples jealousies.

    • Drud

      First, the article is about wealth inequality and not income inequality, I trust you understand the difference. Second, the article is not REALLY about wealth inequality either, it is about tyranny. We are forced to play a losing economic game simply to satisfy the sick, twisted whims of a few elite psychopaths. If you are not p!ssed off you are either part of the problem or you do not understand the stakes.

    • MichaelfromTheEconomicCollapse

      Bryce:

      It is not about “redistributing the wealth”. Rather, the key is to create an environment where everyone is empowered to create their own wealth. That is what free market capitalism is all about. Unfortunately, the system we have today is far from that. The system we have today absolutely cripples individuals and small businesses. Instead, it is dominated by very large collectivist organizations (whether they be “public” or “private”).

      Michael

      • Bill

        That is a mouthful and very well put. May I add the system is rigged at best requiring good people to become bad people to survive.

      • GSOB

        “Since the outbreak of the Fukushima disaster in March 2011, leakage of radiation-contaminated water has posed a major threat to Japan’s population and environment, and to the international community.”

        Let’s take it from the top.

      • krishna

        Very nicely said Michael.Quite often, wealth is not an end in itself, but is a means to an end.Nobody says “whew! I got my 10 billion and thats the end of that!”.Rather, unlimited wealth which equates to unlimited power, almost always leads to unlimited corruption ; usually of the soul.
        I would encourage anyone to google “Sanjay Gandhi” the psychopathic son of Indira gandhi (NO relations to M.K Gandhi B.T.W) and how he used to sadistically run over the poor sleeping on Delhi’s pavements “for fun” or how he used to sterilise poor people because he “could do it”. Or, how about Uday and Khusay, Saddam’s illustrious sons?? or any other monster born into immense wealth and power (Saudi princes are one example).

  • John Pryce

    What a wonderful exercise in the promotion of statism.

    I fall roughly in the bottom 25% of America, but while I’ve often envied men like Bill Gates their wealth, I’ve never despised or disliked them for it. The only time I despise wealth is when the person who holds it received it through politics. Heirs and tycoons don’t bother me in the slightest, and rich tycoons make their money by making my life materially better.

    I don’t care how my wealth or income stacks up against the next guy. If I’m making enough money to support myself, I’m satisfied. I’d certainly LIKE more, and would enjoy more, but I’m not frothing at the mouth that someone is richer than me.

    • Orange Jean

      I agree with you… and I really don’t understand what the obsession some people have with comparing what they have with what someone else has. If I have enough food, clothing, shelter to live a reasonable life… I’m OK with that. I do not compare what I have to what others have. I think it’s important to one’s well being to be content.

      My grandmother (who raised 6 kids alone on an income from cleaning toilets for a living) would say “be satisfied with nothing and you’ll be happy with anything”.

      What I would like more of is: health (mine is kind of disintegrating), friends (too many of mine live too far away), etc.

      Maybe it’s the fact that I once almost lost everything I owned in a wildfire… but I realized after that… that what you own is just STUFF! Too much stuff can be a burden at times, it’s better to try to find someone who needs some of that stuff and give some of it away if you get to that point. I have found that NOTHING is more freeing than the feeling of giving away your excess stuff.

      • K

        Speaking for myself, in general I could care less what the rich are doing. They made their choice, and I would not change places with them. The exception is the vampire capitalists. They take a company, that is in decent shape, and suck it dry.They give themselves and the people at the rop, huge salaries. They do everything the can to pump the stock up, even if in the long run it kills the company. Sears is a great example. They made a killing allowing others to carry Craftsman and Kenmore products. They also killed the company with that action. When that company folds, thousands of people out of work. That is what I object to. Not their wealth, but the ruined lives they leave in their wake.

        • K

          rop should be top, sorry

        • Orange Jean

          Good reply K, you do have some good points. I would also include some of those people who ran Enron and similar companies. Also, in general anyone who makes a living by theft.

        • John Pryce

          Corporate raiders are necessary and good. Companies that gain enough market share often become lazy with regards to internal discipline, and tend to develop bloated management structures that suck up resources and become a drain on both the company and the economy. Raiders free up those resources.
          It’s a shame when a once-great company falls to a raider, but just as Rome died long before it finally fell, so did that company.

      • piccadillybabe

        You are right. It is just stuff and when it is not longer useful, giving it away is a good thing. Good health and nice friends are worth their weight in gold. When it comes down to it, the best things in life are free and having the wisdom to know that does not come easy to most.

    • k

      There are many shady ways to acquire wealth…not just through politics!

      • John Pryce

        Every shady means of achieving wealth that I’m aware of either involves government, some kind of organized crime, or fraud. The last is usually very short-lived, see Bernie Madoff.

        • kk

          That means you are not fully aware. A lot of private citizens also aquire wealth through shady means.

          • John Pryce

            Such as? Cite specific examples please.

          • k

            So people in organised crime or those involved in fraud are not private citizens?

        • k

          This comment is from ‘k’

          the comment system seems to be broken

    • quercus454

      There is the rub. “making enough to support myself”. It’s not the money the wealthy have, but what they do and how they use it. How much is enough money? Is it a million? Is it a billion? Not all, but a large percentage of the wealthy are not content with where they are at, they want more and more. Where is that money going to come from? Are they just going to create it out of thin air, like the Fed? No they will get it from the people lower on the economic ladder.

      The wealthy use their money and power to benefit themselves. By engineering tax/ labor laws and by influencing immigration legislation they take more and more. Add inflation to the mix and the average guy is losing big time.

      Every effort the wealthy make to gain more, means someone else is giving up something.

      • John Pryce

        Again, bull. This moderator deleted my other comment about the origin of wealth, but I’ll try again.
        Capitalism is not a zero-sum game. The gain of the wealthy is not my loss. My gain is not their loss. Trade happens because both parties gain; would you agree to any kind of trade if you didn’t gain more than you offered? Of course not. The other guy is doing the same, so we can reasonably assume that all voluntary trades (barring those involving deliberate fraud) involve mutual gain and profit.
        Wealth is the accumulation of the fruits of one’s labor; some labor is more valuable than others, so someone who does valuable work doesn’t have to work as much to gain a large fortune as someone who works at less valuable tasks. A banker performs valuable work; a ditchdigger less so. A banker will therefore quickly accumulate more wealth than the ditchdigger, because even at a higher standard of living his income may still leave him with more savable/investable funds at the end of the month. This says little about the moral worth as a man of either banker or digger, just their economic value.
        The value of labor directly involves the utility of said labor, but also the availability of substitutes and alternatives. Many, many more people can dig ditches than can do a stockbroker’s work (assuming an honest stockbroker), so the latter’s substitutability is very low.
        Inflation is caused by well-meaning but stupid government monetary policies, not by the actions of wealthy people as such. The people at the Federal Reserve who enact inflationary policies actually believe those policies will help.

        Just for the record: I’m a manual laborer. I make $15 per hour. I am in training to receive a professional license, but it will be some time yet before I get mine.

        As for immigration, increasing the supply of labor does not necessarily decrease the demand for labor. It is entirely possible for a period of momentous immigration to coincide with rapidly RISING wages, because the demand for labor may be rising faster than supply. An infinite amount of work, and therefore potential value, exists, and therefore an infinite number of potential jobs exist. The only thing necessary is the vision to see both the potential value and the necessary business plan to bring it to market, along with the capital markets necessary to provide the capital investment funding. If anything increased immigration is likely to result in a short-term wage decrease followed by a long-term wages INcrease, other things being equal, because the temporary drop in the cost of labor means new projects/businesses will be started, which will increase the demand for labor back above the previous market-clearing value.

        Wealth and resources are also functionally unlimited, at least over the long term. The invention of fracking created new wealth overnight, by transforming shale from waste rock into valuable oil drilling sites, just to give one example. New technologies turn previously useless dirt into valuable materials all the time; one of the most dramatic examples is the refining of kerosene from raw petroleum, which was previously thought of as just a local hazard that ruined farmland. The refinement of kerosene means we suddenly we get “Beverly Hillbillies” scenarios instead.

        As for what wealthy people do with their money; the answer is that it usually depends on how they got it. Tycoons like Bill Gates and Steve Jobs usually invest the bulk of their wealth into either profit-making enterprises (and thereby making it easier for other would-be tycoons to get the capital they need to build their own industrial enterprises) or into charitable organizations. Heirs usually spend the money on luxuries until they run out, or else get a good financial adviser and do what the tycoons do. Politicos usually do the same.
        It’s not a question of what’s “enough”; not everyone wants to retire at 30, and if people are willing to pay you for the work you do there’s no good reason to work for free. Entertainers usually buy expensive houses and live lavish, opulent lifestyles; tycoons usually reinvest the bulk of their income back into their own businesses or into related businesses (like their suppliers).

        If wealth meant a scrabble for the fruit of a collective “money tree” that produced only a finite amount of value, then we might talk about things like “fair share” and “enough money”. But wealth is only taken when it’s the government doing it; Bill Gates didn’t become wealthy by robbing people, he did it by selling them a product they wanted. Most of the wealth he produced DIDN’T EXIST UNTIL HE PRODUCED IT. He didn’t take a “bigger share of the pie”, he MADE “THE PIE” BIGGER, and took a big chunk of the newly bigger “pie”.

  • Bill

    Gary is going to have a field day with this one. I have to admit when I read it, there does seem to be a tad bit of disparity here.

  • hamburger mooncow

    Very Good article; I have something to add which relates strongly to this topic. It is extremely annoying to me when willfuly blind people around the world confuse our current system with “capitalism” and act as if the current world elite “earned” there position and wealth. True capitalism works very well, where people are free to compete! now in order to compete you have to have so many permits, licenses, fees, etc. that you need a lawyer to even have a hope of starting. Then with an inflated currency that large banks get for free (0% interest rates), rising costs make operating nearly impossible for a small business owner. an inflated currrency and 0% rates which turns into free money for the banks and government distorts and destroys every other sector of the economy over time. So to everyone who says “just pull yourself up by your bootstraps”, you are a fool. I own my own business, i know what it is like. the system is endlessly rigged against the working man and small businesses, and you have to inovate and produce and build and work round the clock just to survive and make the rich richer

    • Drud

      Exactly hamburger. I make this point as often as I can: the left in this country says capitalism is evil, just look how rich and corrupt the 1% got because of capitalism, then the right says, well capitalism is good and anything that benefits the corporations and the corporate structure in general is good capitalism. So, the good citizens line up and defend their side, except no one is even speaking about capitalism. This is corporate fascism. Period. Capitalism involves, first and foremost a level play field. That is not what we have. Continuing the sports analogy, it is like one NFL team that gets 9 points per touchdown and 4 per field goal. They win every game, but that isn’t enough. they then have to bribe the officials so that penalties only get called on the opponents. The real irony, is the general public would not put up with this level of unfairness in sports, not even for a minute, but we have been putting up with this an more for decades in the financial sector. Really? In which part of our lives is fairness most important: our livelihoods or a small segment of our entertainment?

      • quercus454

        It’s worse then that. Using your analogy they also break their opponent’s legs before the game.

        • Drud

          Exactly. The state can easily be defined as the entity with the monopoly on legal violence.

      • Anonymous

        Good point on Fascism and Crony Capitalism. If only humans learned from history, we would see that this has all been done before.

        It has always amazed me that people are so anti-union. Yet, when you ask people the history of the unions and why they came to be in the first place, most can’t tell me. Instead, they just echo what they heard on Fox News or from the owner of the company they work for. Do unions have their share of issues, of course. Have some moles been put in place to sabotage? It is possible. Anything with humans will be flawed. However, people should ask themselves why so many politicians fought against unions, and fought to end unions. People should study that Mother Jones was called “The most dangerous woman in America” and put in jail when she led working people to demand a fair wage and level playing field. Back then, businesses made record profits while workers couldn’t pay their bills and were always in debt. Sound familiar? People were so desperate for unions and a fair wage that it came down to Blair Mountain. America eventually ended up with a large middle-class when workers were being paid instead of companies being the only ones to make record profits.

        America, I am begging you, please study history and learn from it. Look at the price those who came before us paid. Please stop believing what the 1% tell you on the news channels that they own. Why do you think Americans are shoved into STEM careers now and laughed at id they study history? Those in power don’t want us studying history and they hope the laughter of society will stop us from learning from history and studying history. This has all been done before. We have their plans laid out in the history books. We know their next move, if we study history.

        • Anonymous

          P.S. Better get your books now. We are heading back into the dark ages. The first book-free library was announced. How quickly and easily do you think the information and “history” can be manipulated once it is all online and there are no books left? This time they aren’t burning the books, they are just quietly taking the books away.

    • El Pollo de Oro

      Hamburger: The game is definitely rigged here in The Banana Republic of America, and if you’re a small business owner, the system will kick you in the gut at every turn. Here in Philly, for example, the local Democrap-controlled government will give huge tax breaks to Comcast while taxing a bodega owner out of existence (this is the city that wanted a blogger to pay a $300 “licensing fee” for earning some paltry amount). So what happens when enough Americans get sick of this rigged game, say “Screw the system” and decide that joining the underground economy is the only way to be entrepreneurial? Well, one need only look at the bloodbath in México to get the answer to that question. The idiots who say “just pull yourself up by your bootstraps” will get a brutal dose of reality when more Americans feed themselves by joining the underground economy.

  • Mondobeyondo

    The deck is stacked against you. You’d have better luck at the roulette tables in Las Vegas. Yes, I used to play roulette, slots, craps, blackjack, etc. before I knew the Lord. Excalibur, Caesars Palace, Circus Circus, etc. Let me tell you, you lose more often than you win.
    No wonder I feel so broke…

    • Jeremy

      Mondo,

      You have enriched my life with your comments on this site. I wanted to encourage you, and say thank you for your contribution to this website.

  • Mondobeyondo

    I agree, a great awakening is coming up.
    But the only way many people are going to awaken, is if you rub some smelling salts under their noses.

    Maybe then, they’ll finally wake up. And even that is a long shot.

  • davidmpark

    Breaking that control matrix is hard to do.

    One becomes addicted to the ease of it; the lack of accountable thought, the ease of money and credit, the… high school mentality.

    Breaking it was painful – mentally and emotionally. When it all comes crashing in what happened to you,it’s like rage and anger at the injustices of it all that one cannot describe other than peeling back the seal of hell and taking a breath of it. The anguish and panic were terrible. The sense of loss, the ostracizing from those still dedicated to this high school mentality and socializing is unbelievable.

    Then comes the struggles of trying to rely upon yourself in ways you never thought possible. The learning curves for multiple disciplines is stressful at first. Much of this culture is about specialization. When outside the matrix, specialization is starvation and loss. Going at it easy and adding to your skill line upon line, project upon project; it all comes together. You learn how everything in life works together, not in specialized, sequestered disciplines. When working with one basic leads to multiple fields of study and more and more building up to create a better life.

    And then, with more success built upon earlier success, being outside the control matrix becomes intoxicating. The thrill of being able to build and craft closer to the heart’s desire, to grow food and fibers, to vet and perform medical aid, to see what things can be rather than how much others want for it… to be about creation and renewal, rather than simply consuming. You become unstoppable as all things are opened to you – all elements and materials becomes what you need by skill and intelligence!

    And then, the term poverty seems so odd and out of place – everything in the world can provide your needs and wants. And in so doing, what use is another’s wealth you can fulfill your needs without them, and care for those who cannot care for themselves.

  • Chive Barnes

    The defining moment when the dominance of the global elites was laid bare for all to see was at the start of the Great Recession when governments instituted zero interest rate policy to benefit big banks and the big banks turned around and doubled or tripled credit card interest rates for hundreds of millions of the non-elite. But the great herd of the public just rolled over passively, absorbed the propaganda and went on serving their masters.

    • XSANDIEGOCA

      You got that right!

  • Mondobeyondo

    It’s true. You can have everything you want in life. All the fame, fortune and fun a human being ever desired.

    Just be prepared to pay the price. For there IS a price to pay. You gave up your soul for eternity, for a life of pleasure on earth.

    “I sold my soul to the devil! It was a crappy deal! At least it came with a few toys, like a Happy Meal!”

    Yes it did, Kanye. You got your toys. You got Kim Kardashian. You got your mansions. Your fame and your fortune. You exchanged your soul for those.

    Yep – definitely a “crappy deal”, buddy.

    • k

      how is getting kim kardashian a crappy deal?

      • Tim

        Under that thin veneer of her looks is an empty soul.

        • KRISHNA

          If you think that getting a disease ridden whore is not crappy, you need your head examined.

          • Tim

            I think you meant to reply to “k”.

        • k

          Most women and most men have empty souls. Just because she made a video doesnt mean she is the only one.

          • Tim

            I agree that “most women and most men have empty souls.” Here’s the reason.

            “Having the understanding darkened, being alienated from the life of God through the ignorance that is in them, because of the blindness of their heart:” Ephesians 4:18

          • Anonymous

            And many men and women marry, and stay married, for economic reasons alone.

      • Mondobeyondo

        Because Kanye sold his soul to get her.

    • Guest

      Kanye sold his soul to get her.

  • Georgiaboy61

    The golden mean isn’t merely an abstraction created by do-gooders and parents trying to get their children to behave – it is a moral principle of genuine value and wisdom. Anything taken to an extreme – even a good thing – can become malignant.

    The creation and gathering of wealth are necessary for true economic and personal freedom – but allowing these things to be taken to an extreme has proven to be extremely damaging to civilization and the lot of the common person.

    Why do the uber-wealthy – the super-rich – continue to pursue ever more wealth even after they have accumulated far-more than they can ever spend? The answer is simple: it isn’t about wealth by that time, but power and satisfying their massive egos.

    Extreme wealth confers extreme power – the power to bend others to one’s will, the power to erect or topple governments, the power to change the course of society or civilization itself. This power is like a drug to the very rich – many of whom are not the most-balanced individuals in the first place.

    Economic times are very hard for tens, perhaps hundreds of millions of people, are being pushed against the wall and have nowhere else to turn. Yet, the elites keep pushing, squeezing every last drop of profit out of them. Soon, the hard-pressed will have literally nothing left to lose – and people with nothing left to lose are dangerous. This is the message of history.

    A day of reckoning is coming; the elites of the world are rich, but they are out-numbered hundreds of millions to one. If they continue to sow the wind, they will – in time – reap the whirlwind.

    • quercus454

      Absolutely!

  • Richard

    You are all wrong about this. YOU CANNOT BLAME WEALTHY PEOPLE FOR TAKING ADVANTAGE OF THE SYSTEM. To do so is nothing but naive.

    The problem is one of inadequate laws that PERMIT these people to milk the system. If robbery were not illegal, would you blame robbers for robbery? (Oh yes, of course you would. I forgot).

    You need to blame the system. You need to blame Congress. You need to blame the very basis on which your sick country lives and does business. The American Way Of Life SIMPLY DOES NOT WORK. It never has and in its present form it never will.

    But none of you want to admit that, do you? You just want to hide behind the dastardly CRIMINAL OLIGARCHS who abuse the system… because it is so much EASIER to think like that and so much more convenient to blame straw dogs than the real deal. You’d have to criticize “America” then, wouldn’t you?

    • k

      How about blaming them for gaming the system, and many who had the power to do it are in the 1% percent. Many 1 percenters are honest, but many are gamers too.

      To be more accurate, i believe the gamers are in the top .1 percent.

    • ism

      Yes. And that system called capitalism.

      As socialist I believe there should be maximum allowable rate of inequality, let say 1:12 If lowest rate is $10 p/hr highest should be $120 p/hr

      I think something like that was in USA in 50 th – 60 th.

      When average worker was able easy to buy house, car etc. And there was money for military build up , space program, housing, health-care etc.

      Whats wrong with that?

      • Malcolm Reynolds

        “Whats wrong with that?”
        Aside from the fact that your utopian vision of socialism has never been realized and doesn’t work?

        • Anonymous

          What system does work? From where I stand, it looks as if all of the systems are failing. They all sound great in theory though.

          What system solves prostitution (all forms of it)? Humans should not have to sell their soul, or their body, to feed themselves. Until there is a peaceful, non-forceful system that solves all of the problems, none of the systems are flaw-free and will be exploited by those who can exploit.

          • Malcolm Reynolds

            I dunno, capitalism seems to have liberated more people from poverty than any other system.
            And please don’t rebut me with thoughts on today, this country hasn’t seen capitalism in a loooong time.
            And why shouldn’t a person that’s either just dumb, lazy or whatever sell their body if that’s all they have going for them?
            Brothels have existed as long as booze has.

          • John Pryce

            Longer; it’s called “the oldest profession” for a reason.

          • Malcolm Reynolds

            lol, good point.

          • John Pryce

            This country HAS seen capitalism, recently even, but its usually only in newly emerging industries like 3D printing and LASIK surgery.

          • Anonymous

            Many prostitutes are very intelligent, compassionate people, and many are far from lazy.

            Capitalism did produce a wonderful, large middle-class. As you noted, we no longer have true Capitalism. My point is that there is no perfect system, and no perfect fix.

          • Malcolm Reynolds

            Ok, so maybe she just likes to hump a lot. Who cares.

            And your vote would be what then?
            Go back to the capitalism and limited govt that allowed FAR more people to prosper than anything else EVER, or lets continue towards communism that always murders mass numbers of people and impoverishes the rest?

          • Anonymous

            We could push “reset” right now and it wouldn’t matter. Within a few generations, we would be right back here. There will always be warriors that refuse to just leave the peaceful farmers alone and let them farm in peace. People will always be greedy, selfish, lying, cheating jerks that think they are better and smarter than everyone else and therefore should control everyone else. Others will always try to force their beliefs and way of life onto everyone else. There will always be the wealthy who do no work, and the poor that barely have time to sleep because they work so long and hard. The wealthy will always exploit the rich (regardless of the “ism” they are under-which is also why prostitution is the oldest profession). Any student of history could easily point to endless examples of all of this throughout every generation. Until humans change (which will never happen) history will just keep repeating itself. Frankly, I don’t understand how God can stand to sit and watch the re-runs. However, His ways are higher than mine.

          • Anonymous

            Correction: The wealthy will always exploit the poor.

          • John Pryce

            What about all the ways in which the poor exploit the wealthy?
            A janitor at Microsoft makes a hell of a lot more money than a janitor at a corner store, without any extra brainpower or any increased effort in his work. He gets the extra pay by riding on the brains of men like Bill Gates.

          • Malcolm Reynolds

            Yikes. 0_0

      • John Pryce

        A corporate CEO makes a business decision that saves the company $3 billion that year, without cheating anyone or firing any employees. What is his “fair share” of the $3 billion?

        • Gay Veteran

          A corporate CEO makes a business decision that COSTS the company $3 billion that year?
          will he still keep his outrageously high salary? or get fired and use his golden parachute?

          • John Pryce

            That’s covered in the contract the Board of Directors offers him when he comes on board.
            Usually if he makes a decision that costs the company money in a given year, he forgoes his bonus and stock options that year.
            I wasn’t suggesting that he receive even a statistically significant chuck of the $3 billion, just that he’s obviously justly due a great deal more than 12 times the salary of his lowest paid worker if he does. If I was on the board, and his contract didn’t cover this specific scenario, I would probably say “Give him 3%, release a dividend of 20%, and put the rest into settling company debts and R&D”.
            As for the loss, I’d say “No bonus for you, and you’ve got one year to turn this around or else we’ll fire you.”

          • Malcolm Reynolds

            I don’t recall seeing you around these parts before today. Be careful arguing with that one. He’ll go in circles and you’ll only get dizzy. I’ve given up. He doesn’t want the truth, he is way left and just wants to tear it all down.

          • John Pryce

            I AM new to this blog, and I’m only here because I saw something on Captain Capitalism (I think). I think the premise of this article is ridiculous, for the record.

          • Malcolm Reynolds

            Don’t give up on this site. Sometimes the stuff he writes kinda comes off as kooky leftist, but I assure you he is not. He’s got a big heart and is on Capitalism’s side.
            I haven’t read anything explicitly saying so, but I suspect he understands that Moral Sentiments is the required companion of Wealth of Nations.
            Never heard of CC site before. Will have to check it out.

          • John Pryce

            And frankly I’m used to guys like that. I’ve been following a pro-gun blog called The Smallest Minority for a while, and we had a leftist named Markadelphia who seemed to sincerely believe what he said, but had a love/hate/flee in terror relationship with the site. He was finally asked to leave, after a vote of the regular contributors, a few months ago.
            All leftists are basically the same, and leftists on the Interweb usually argue the same, so I’m not worried.
            Marky would regularly cite – as evidence for his positions – articles whose conclusions flatly contradicted him. When this happened, he usually ignored the people who pointed it out.
            I didn’t mind his presence; the debates got really lively when he said something, and I did some of my finest rhetorical work in them. But the rest of them thought he was a stupid distraction.
            Frankly, I miss him. We used to get 300+ comments on a blog post of two paragraphs when he was around.

          • Malcolm Reynolds

            Dude! You are SO gonna fit in here. Hell ya.

            Wait till you meet 2Gary2. He’s our resident communist that comes here long enough to cut n paste some pap (He’s totally a muppet), revel in conservative failure and advocate ‘tax the rich hard and spread the wealth’.

          • Gay Veteran

            you wouldn’t know the truth if it bit you on the a**

          • Malcolm Reynolds

            HAHAHAHA. That’s rich.

          • Gay Veteran

            often the Board of Directors are as much scumbags as the CEO.
            most of our problems are not due to globalism but multi-nationals (h/t Gerald Celente who is no left winger)

          • Anonymous

            Applause. +100 up votes

        • Anonymous

          Why do some CEOs get a huge raise when sales drop, even as many employees report that they cannot afford rent, clothes, shoes, food, families, etc.?

          • John Pryce

            The truthful response, and probably the one you don’t want to hear, is that CEOs who are brought in from outside an existing corporation are the ones most likely to have that happen, and the reason is that their employment contract mandates it.
            Case in point: executives who received large bonuses after the bailouts of 2009. This was actually in their employment contract, and therefore the corporation legally had to give it to them.
            I actually don’t agree with the practice either, but the truth is that the CEO has a much greater impact on the profitability of a corporation than any of the line employees, so the Board of Directors usually spends a great deal of time and energy investigating candidates before selecting one, as the difference between a good and a bad one is often measured in billions of dollars.
            One response to this is usually: “those Board members must be picking their friends in return for kickbacks, and sticking the stockholders with the bill!”
            And while that has a certain plausibility (and has probably happened more than once), plausibility is not a measurement of truth, and the truth is that corporations in which the Board members own the majority or all of the equity stock usually offer MORE money and perks, not less.
            Imagine offering a line employee this contract: “Your base salary will be $45,000. If the company makes a profit above a certain level, you will get a $5000 bonus that year. If it doesn’t, you don’t get a bonus.”
            The situation is often the same with CEOs, only the margins are much larger, and CEOs are often paid very small salaries, with the rest being perks, stock options and performance bonuses.
            The so-called “golden parachute” situation, where a bad CEO gets a mutli-million dollar severance package, is also the result of a rational (if expensive and distasteful) calculation by the board. If he was contractually hired for 3 years, and you decide you want him gone after just one, you literally don’t have the legal right to just fire him. Notice the “contractually” part of the last sentence. If the contract specifies a severance package for early termination, it MUST be granted. If it doesn’t, he’s legally free to ask whatever he wants.
            It’s very similar to the wife of a rich man who gets a huge divorce settlement when the couple doesn’t have a pre-nup (see Tiger Woods). The rich man knows that the cost of ending his marriage to her is huge, but the idea of staying with her is more repulsive, so he pays her off and is free of her.

          • Anonymous

            …CEO has greater impact on the profitability…..than the line employees.”

            Hmmmm……if none of those line employees showed up for a month I wonder how profitable the company would be?

            There are other countries where the working class actually stand together and walk out together, so I already know the answer to the above question.

            The scorpion (CEOs, etc.) has been getting a free ride on the crocodile’s (working class people) back long enough, in my opinion.

          • John Pryce

            Spoken like a true Marxist. I suppose its just a coincidence that all those nations where “the working class stands together” have lower standards of living for that working class than any of those nations where they don’t “stand together”.
            I also think men like Bill Gates would have done just fine for himself without any of those people who agreed to work for him in return for their not-inconsiderable salaries.
            Oh, that’s right, people work for pay! They don’t work for a tycoon out of the goodness of their heart or as a favor to him, they do it because he pays them. Silly me.
            This is one of the reasons I go back and read Atlas Shrugged on a regular basis, I keep finding real-world people who spout literally the same things Ayn Rand’s villains spout.
            It always makes me want to retort with “we’ll see who really needs who, and what happens to who, when the tycoons are the ones going on strike.”
            If you must approach this from a collectivist perspective, I think its patently obvious that the world benefited more from the existence of Bill Gates than it has from the existence of anyone currently serving in an elected office. I also think that, if we must rank people according to their social value, that Bill Gates – and men like him – are each worth more at least 10 times more than everyone on this forum combined, you and myself included.

    • Drud

      Richard, you can’t afford to be so naive, It is not just that the rich elite are taking advantage of laws that Congress made in good faith. The rich elite OWN Congress and had their lackeys there put the laws in place. When the banks were failing their execs didn’t go to Congress hat-in-hand asking for some time to sort out the problems, they went to Congress demanding that laws be changed so that everything they had been doing would now be “legal.” The biggest problem people have is separating the government from the corporations. The libs blame the corporations and the cons blame the big government and we are at each others throats instead of facing the true enemy: the massive single entity that is the government and the corporations.

      • Anonymous

        “The biggest problem people have is separating the government from the corporations.”

        Perhaps it is because they are married and have become one? Glad you noted that they are a single entity at the end of your comment.

        “We are at each other’s throats instead of facing the true enemy.”

        Agree. That is the way it was planned and set up. Keep the 99% fighting with one another over anything and everything so that the 1% continue to get away with anything they want to.

    • quercus454

      “YOU CANNOT BLAME WEALTHY PEOPLE FOR TAKING ADVANTAGE OF THE SYSTEM”

      Yes you can, because they are the ones who are controlling the system. They have enough wealth to buy what ever legislation they want.Everyone talks about the high corporate rate of tax in this country. But how many companies ever pay that rate? Were those loopholes just a mistake or were they intentional? Almost every political decision made that involves corporations and money are being controlled by the people who will benefit. Those at the top of those industries.
      It isn’t what is best for the country as a whole, but just those at the top..

  • Rufus T Firefly

    So who are the 85 people that own so much so that we can take time out from watching the boob tube to worship them as the gods they are?

    • k

      Political dynasties,oil dynasties are some of them i can think of.

  • Kyle

    How hardly shall they who have riches enter into the kingdom of God. At times I get angry about things in this article but then I read that verse from the Gospels and I realize it’s better to be apart of the poor half than the rich one percent. Most of those poor bastards are going to hell and their money can’t save them not only that but it WILL likely keep them from the truth of salvation living in luxury they don’t have a care in the world.

    So in the end you could call it poetic justice. I’d rather have Jesus than the world.

    For what would a man have if he gained the world and lost his soul? Or what would a man give in exchange for his soul?

    Amen

    • Tim

      “Hearken, my beloved brethren, Hath not God chosen the poor of this world rich in faith, and heirs of the kingdom which he hath promised to them that love him?” James 2:5

  • Ben

    If you earn more than $34,000 a year, you are in the global 1%, so be careful when demonizing the “wealthy” — you may be the wealthy elite by global standards!

    • El Pollo de Oro

      By Haiti’s standards, the poor in Jamaica are relatively affluent. That said, I won’t be wandering into the slums of Trenchtown anytime soon to lecture the Kingston poor on “how good they have it.”

  • Bill

    Common “cents” would say that college grads would have the best chance of moving up the economic ladder but recent stats say otherwise. The close of 2013 has witnessed an alarming increase in delinquencies and defaults of student loans. This Trillion $ problem has many implications. It continues to concentrate a select few at the top of the economic ladder as well as pushing more to the bottom or even off the ladder. Worst, it is one more reason for economic destruction.

  • Citizen X19

    People like Bill Gates made his money by using his God given brains, hard work and a certain amount of luck. The USA provides opportunities like that. You have to figure out the key to your own success in this life. I for one don’t believe the rich should have to “redistribute” their wealth to the undeserving or envious because they feel life is unfair. Envy and sloth are sins, remember that.

    • Bill

      There are a very select few true Philanthropists, however most of the elite are greedy and choose the ways of the cabal. This is the difference between “should” and “do”.

      By the way, I consider Bill Gates an extremely talented “fence walker”.

  • eddiestale

    people on this board are probably in the shrinking middle class and desperately clinging to it. we have no illusion of having 100 million in assets nor do we expect to become dirt poor. odds are that we will become dirt poor…..

  • eddiestale

    I assign garyboy to go to those 85 and take their stuff, monetize it and distribute to the remaining billions of people. this way, we can all end up with $200.

  • XSANDIEGOCA

    I do not begrudge the wealthy their wealth. I would not mind moving up myself. What I object to are two forms of justice, one for the Elites, one for the rest of us. Just this week, the cops raided Justin Bieber’s mansion on a vandalism charge and discovered mucho “dope” in plain sight! Was Justin clapped in irons? Not at all. Just a slap on the wrist. We see this kid glove treatment accorded the celebs all the time. Closer to home, to my knowledge not a single Bankster has walked the plank for the 2008 subprime debacle, the biggest heist of all time. If you have the money and access to the best lawyers money can buy, you can pretty well get away with murder in this country. I was taking a break with the fellow “little people” at work and as we watched Bieber beat the rap the comments indicated just how much this is accepted as the Holy Writ. Until that changes, it will only get worse.

    • Gay Veteran

      “I do not begrudge the wealthy their wealth….”

      depends on HOW they got their wealth.
      wall street banksers? food for pigs

      • El Pollo de Oro

        The only problem I have with feeding Wall Street banksters to pigs is that pigs deserve better. Even pigs have higher standards than banksters.

        • Gay Veteran

          how about feeding them to a wood chipper?

      • Malcolm Reynolds

        And I suppose you and the other Occupyers are the arbiters of that?

        • Gay Veteran

          hey, if you want to defend the banksters then knock yourself out

      • Anonymous

        “Behind every great fortune LIES great crime.” -Honore de Balzac

        Is it “their” wealth if it was earned only by the sweat and back of another? What real work have the wealthy done to earn their wealth? How many of the wealthy families were out there digging ditches to build this country? How many of the wealthy sweat and go home with sore backs, hands, and feet only to do it all again the next day? There would be no wealth, now or in history, without the working class. The working class produce everything by their real work.

        What coal miners of the past lived through is evidence that the wealthy do not like to pay the working class fair wages, and prefer not to pay the working class at all (which is why the cost of living is so high while pay is so low-everything the working man makes goes back to the power company and other companies that the wealthy own). The coal miners had to fight to be able to form unions and had to fight to make the wages they now make. Sadly, many American workers have forgotten Blair Mountain and the struggle of the coal miners/working class people, and instead often echo what they heard on the news channels (that the wealthy own), and echo what the company owners that they work for said.

        Ask many anti-union people why the unions were originally formed and the history of unions. Let me know if any of them can say more than “Union bad. Work for low wages good.”

  • Orac4Prez

    One day, when the Lord comes to judge, what do you think he will ask of those 85 rich people? He has allowed them to accumulate vast riches. I think when He asks them what they have accomplished with “their” bounty, and the wisdom of their choices would be rather frightening to contemplate…

    • Tim

      Yes, the Lord does allow some to accumulate great riches. But the first chapter of the book of Proverbs says that fools are destroyed by their own prosperity! See Proverbs 1:32.

      • Anonymous

        May the working class find comfort in James 5.

  • Hillbilly

    It’s a shell game. You know pick the one of the three that has the pea under it? Trick is there is no pea! They will never let you turn over all three at the same time.

  • Luis

    The Oxfam article is a fodder of lies for the digestion of the masses. I’ve read Rothchild’s net worth is somewhere in the 10-100 trillion dollar range. Rockefeller about 10 trillion. I’ve heard Queen Elizabeth is also insanely wealthy. According to former world bank attorney Karen Hudes, the Catholic church is probably the wealthiest of all. They own most of the world’s gold. These guys are always left off these types of lists… shows you who the real power brokers are….

    • djc

      Lol, The Catholic Church’s wealth is less than that of a mid-sized university, excepting their art collection which is open for all to view. If they sold the art, which is their patrimony, only the uber wealthy would ever have access to it.

      I don’t even know how to address your statement that the church owns most of the worlds gold. More than Germany? More than the UK? More than China?

      Wow.

    • Anonymous

      You are right. The Queen owns 1/6 of all of the world’s dry land from some reports I have heard.

      What nobody can seem to answer for me: Why do Americans have to hear every move the monarchy in the UK make? Didn’t we fight a war in America so we could distance ourselves from the monarchy? How I wish every American had personally taught their children history. Perhaps I could watch t.v. in the USA free of monarchy reports, almost weekly, if people still spoke the truth about those people, and remembered why our ancestors wanted no part with them.

  • Boo-urns

    The issue is not that the wealthy have so much, but that the non-wealthy have so little and are constantly being forced to make do with less and less, and with more and more barriers placed between them and the ability to earn more. These two issues are not the same.

  • Randy Townsend

    Articles like this come very close to the assertion, LOVED by the left, that the “rich” have in some way “taken” from the poor. BS. The vast majority of the poor do not possess the earning potential of the rich (and I’m not rich – no where close!). They do not have and never will have wealth. This class warfare does nothing but stoke resentment and envy – the poor are still poor.

    • Gay Veteran

      all you have to do is look to Wall Street and see how “worthy” the rich are

      • John Pryce

        Wall Street is unfortunately heavily involved with politics, and that is frankly nothing very new. Anyone who obtains (notice I don’t say ‘earns’) a fortune by means of political connections is by definition a scoundrel.
        Silicon Valley is a much better example of worthy rich.

        • Gay Veteran

          except when Silicon Valley imports foreign labor

          • John Pryce

            ….. What’s wrong with that?

          • Gay Veteran

            uh, abusing the visa process to hire cheap foreign labor

          • John Pryce

            Are you saying they should seek to deliberately increase their labor costs?

          • Gay Veteran

            hey Einstein, I’m saying American workers are more important than foreign workers

          • John Pryce

            Re-read your Bastiat. American CUSTOMERS outnumber the employees at any one company by a margin of at least 2 orders of magnitude, and they benefit from businesses reducing their costs and thereby their prices.
            Besides which, tax and labor law reform would end the outsourcing phenomena entirely, probably overnight. It would also tend to bring more foreign businesses and corporations here, thereby benefiting us further.

          • Gay Veteran

            “…they benefit from businesses reducing their costs and thereby their prices…..”

            oh yeah, they benefited when their jobs were sent to China!

            “…Besides which, tax and labor law reform would end the outsourcing phenomena entirely….”

            hey Einstein, how are the American workers going to compete with a country like China that has near slave labor wages and NO environmental laws?

            jeez, every website has to have a corporation loving lickspittle

          • John Pryce

            IF you want a simpler solution, then all you really have to do is not interfere with the rise of 3D printing. IT will literally replace China as the source of retail consumer products, and will probably end WalMart too. It will also likely make sales taxes effectively meaningless.

          • John Pryce

            And all of those employees are also customers, so they too benefit from outsourcing (if and when outsourcing is actually of economic benefit), just in a more indirect fashion.

          • Gay Veteran

            hey junior, did you see the Michael’s article about employees at Wal-Mart trying to get donations for other Wal-Mart employees?
            but keep licking that corporate boot, soon we’ll all be Chinese workers

          • John Pryce

            What I find interesting is people like you who think that slavery is difficult to compete with, that somehow treating one’s employees like slaves, or simply paying them as little as possible, is the correct means of economic advancement for businesses or nations.
            Please find me a single example throughout history of a slave-holding nation being wealthier than a free one, or of a leading business (corporate or not) that actually paid lower wages than its primary competition for comparable work. Remember, LEADING business. It has to be the frontrunner in its industry at the time of the comparison, or it doesn’t count.
            I can cite at least 5 leading businesses that paid the highest wages in the industry when they were at the top, just off the top of my head: Standard Oil, Ford Motor Company (under Henry Ford), Microsoft, Carnegie Steel, and Google.
            Contra the Marxist notion that all workers are essentially the same and therefore tycoons can and do treat them as interchangeable, the reality is the complete opposite: talented people are often extremely difficult to find, and you don’t DARE let them go without a fight when you do find one.
            Henry Ford offered $5 per day at a time where the industry average was $3 per day, and he got the best workers in the business (he did have some odd notions about economics, granted, but this one was spot on).
            Increases in productivity are brought about by capital investments; meaning machinery. Increased capital investment means wages rise, because the productivity of each worker (and therefore his value to the company’s profits) rises. America has far and away the highest invested capital per worker; the reason businesses and corporations are outsourcing and fleeing altogether is because of political interference in the market, which is the primary factor preventing effective competition with China’s supposed “slave labor”. Eliminate that interference and people will forget China existed inside a year.

          • Gay Veteran

            No Western country can compete with China for several types of goods (but not all) because China, compared to Western countries, has near slave labor wages and NO environmental laws. That is an absolute advantage for China.

          • John Pryce

            Actually it’s not, because slaves are inefficient compared to free labor.
            Chinese workers are lower paid compared to Americans for two reasons: 1) they are lower skilled, on average, and 2)there is less capital investment per worker, so their productivity is substantially lower.
            Communism makes this situation still worse, but this situation would remain whether the Chinese government was a factor or not.
            Again, per champion economist Ludwig von Mises, you cannot get a man’s best effort by treating him like an animal; you can only get an animal’s effort, and most beasts of burden are stronger than men. To get a man’s best, you have to treat him like a man, and that includes paying him according to his productivity.
            And actually, I would favor expanding free trade agreements generally and reducing all tariffs, import quotas, and duties to effectively zero, and further permitting the effectively free flow of capital across national borders.
            I firmly believe it would be to the economic BENEFIT of America in general, and to the American worker in particular, to do this, especially if we undertook a simultaneous program to decontrol and remove the influence of the state from the economy.

          • Gay Veteran

            Millions of American jobs were sent overseas for basically 2 reasons: cheaper labor, no environmental laws.
            Many industries don’t require a lot of labor skill, and the state is providing the capital.
            And China is communist in name only.
            Expanding “free trade” would result in even more American jobs being lost.
            But you got your talking points down.

          • John Pryce

            Interesting. You have convinced yourself that I can not actually believe what I am saying, but I am saying it anyway for reasons of posturing.
            I at least do you the credit of taking what you are saying seriously, under the assumption that you actually believe the things you tell me you believe. If you plan to have a conversation, you at least owe your partner the courtesy of taking what he says seriously.
            If you think free trade is so bad for Americans, answer me this: if the Japanese automaker Toyota makes a vehicle in a particular class and of a particular type that is both superior in performance/durability/fuel economy AND is cheaper than the comparable model made by GM, what benefit does the American consumer derive from tariffs that drive the cost of the Toyota higher than the GM car?
            Obviously, he derives none. So long as tariffs shield GM from the effects of their incompetence, they will change nothing, and so the situation will not improve. Remember that it is not just the American consumer that buys Toyota cars and machines: it is other businesses. Tariffs raise their costs as well when they buy company vehicles or heavy machinery. These cost increases must be, and will be, passed on to their customers one way or another. The net effect of a tariff is positive for only one industry at a time, and negative for the economy as a whole. See the effects of the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act of 1930: the unemployment caused by the Crash never reached as high as 10%, and had fallen to less than 6% by the time Hoover signed the Tariff Act. Immediately the recovery ended, and within a year and a half unemployment reached 25%.
            At present, GM’s problems are internal, and largely caused by the UAW. A properly conducted bankruptcy, as was prevented by the auto bailouts and later by Obama’s shafting of the secured bondholders, would have given non-union shareholders and management a chance to renegotiate long-entrenched and destructive labor policies

            and possibly turn GM’s situation around. This was actively prevented by their bailouts, thereby preventing the corrective actions that MUST take place if GM is to ever regain its position as top dog in the automotive industry.
            You imagine that protective tariffs aid American businesses; well, how about lets extrapolate? How about tariffs enacted by the state you live in against ‘imports’ from other states; would that help your State at all? How about your county? Municipality? How about just your neighborhood, or your house?
            Each of these things would be bad for you, and the tighter you drew the noose, the more you would choke yourself.
            You really need to go back to Econ 101 and study the concept of ‘comparative advantage’, because if you ever learned it, you forgot it.

          • Gay Veteran

            you know a lot of THEORY, but the FACT is that American jobs have been sent to China, India,Vietnam, etc.
            The Japanese automaker is an extremely bad comparison. Japan is not China, there are no near slave wages, and Japan has environmental laws.

          • John Pryce

            (consolidating my responses into one for easier communications)

            Did I suggest that outsourcing hasn’t happened? I have not only indicated that it has, I have told you the actual reasons why: American laws have made outsourcing a more profitable option than domestic production. Repealing those laws (And believe it or not, most environmental issues aren’t a part of this) would largely end the problem; outsourcing often has significant start-up costs and serious cultural-clash problems that are actually a big expense for businesses that do it.

            Secondly I’m talking about the actual, real-world history and practice of the things your are spouting, not name-dropping. And once again, your facts are off. Huge amounts of the rare-earth minerals that we need to produce high-tech weaponry, to say nothing of civilian-use tech, comes from Chinese mines , for the simple reason that the EPA has (some believe intentionally) made the extraction of these minerals so difficult. The EPA has been credibly accused of going far beyond its mandate of environmental protection when it comes to mining and resource extraction, and with good reason. So yes, we actually are, at this very moment and for several years now, entirely dependent on Chinese imports to make our weapons.

            And finally: using a tariff as a revenue-generating tax to fund the government is acceptable, because the revenue goes up as the imports flow in, and so there is no incentive for the state to try to limit imports, or to do anything but encourage them. Using them for protectionism is, by contrast, both morally wrong and economically disastrous. The 1930 Tariff Act that I already mentioned was one of the best real-world examples of exactly that. It devastated international trade for most of a decade, and had the net effect of not only greatly prolonging the Great Depression (it is still widely credited with being the single worst thing in a long line of bad things the government did to the economy in the 1930s) but also exporting the Depression to every country we traded with. Passing protectionistic tariffs is bad even if the only effect you consider is the retaliatory tariffs other nations would (and historically, DID) pass against our EXPORTS, thereby proving that such tariffs actively harm American EXporters at least as much or more than it helps domestic industries. It also hurts American IMporters, whose costs (and therefore prices) rise.

          • Gay Veteran

            imposing anti-monopoly laws on ALL aspects of the medical field would be a great help. Karl Denninger shows that medical costs would drop over 50%

          • John Pryce

            ……….. what? The extent to which medicine is monopolistic now is the extent to which it is granted protection from competition by existing laws. Why pass new laws when repealing old ones would have the same effect?

          • Gay Veteran

            well that would have the same effect, wouldn’t it

          • John Pryce

            It would, only the effect would be cheaper, and it wouldn’t give more power to the federal government, and it wouldn’t fuel the ridiculous idea that the Sherman Anti-Trust Act and subsequent laws have accomplished anything positive.

          • John Pryce

            The next logical step in what you are advocating is what Otto von Bismark called ‘autarky’, which is the idea that a state should never be dependent in any way on imports from another nation, and should produce everything it needs itself. He allowed for imports of luxuries and “alternative options” for necessities, but really the line of reasoning goes against international trade entirely.
            So it begs the question, what do you do when your industry needs a particular resource, but the only major source of it is in another nation? If your economic philosophy is that you shouldn’t engage in trade for necessities, your impulse will be to start a war of conquest. This is the foundation of imperialism, in the literal sense of “empire”.

          • Gay Veteran

            man you like to name drop, no need to try and impress us.
            our trade with China has little to do with resources

          • John Pryce

            For the record, I’m not saying you’re wrong about the need to better compete with China; I’m saying you’ve completely misunderstood the problem and are therefore likely to advocate completely the wrong solution. If anything, your economic notions imply to me that your solutions would actually make the problem worse, long-term.

          • Gay Veteran

            and what “economic notions” have I advocated?

            The first thing we need to do is to repeal the “free” trade agreements and bring all those jobs back to the U.S.

          • John Pryce

            You are advocating protectionism, and you are coming across like a mercantilist. Protectionism is short-term gain (in a small number of industries, offset by losses in others and to the general population) followed by long-term loss, and mercantilism is much, much worse.

          • Gay Veteran

            Interesting that America prospered for decades with tariffs (which paid for the Federal government without income taxes).
            “free trade” merely guarantees the impoverishment of the American worker, as we have seen now post-NAFTA, etc.

          • John Pryce

            And? America prospered for many years with the extraordinarily high tax rates from WW2, until JFK finally cut them. That we can prosper with high tariffs does not mean that the tariffs are the CAUSE of the prospering, nor does it mean that we would be better off raising them.
            Free trade means that resources go to wherever they are the most valued – that is, wherever they bring the highest price. That is the correct place for them to go, even if its not here.
            Mitt Romney made use of overseas tax shelters. Why? He was a money manager, and overseas was the smart place to put his money. I don’t blame him for doing that, it’s his money. I blame the people who make this a bad place to invest.

          • Gay Veteran

            “…Free trade means that resources go to wherever they are the most valued – that is, wherever they bring the highest price….”
            perhaps in a theoretical world. in the real world nations with low wages and no environmental laws win

          • John Pryce

            That is not true, or else the Soviet Union would have been very wealthy. It had the lowest real wages in the developed world (excepting Cuba, which remains much, much worse), and the probably the least environmental protection in the entire world.
            China seems to be winning now not because it has so many advantages (it doesn’t), but because American labor, wage, and finance laws (among others) are hamstringing our ability to compete.
            We don’t need tariffs to win; we need to take the chains off of our economic engines.
            Can’t compete with wages? Who cares! We can demolish them by competing in manufacturing costs just with the amount of invested capital machinery we have; even the high wages cease to be a competitive issue when our workers can produce ten times as much ( or more) as theirs, and with better quality control to boot (Chinese CONTRACT law is something of a nightmare, even in China. Try suing in China for breech of contract when the other guy has political connections; you’ll get nowhere. That is actually a potential ball-and-chain for the Chinese economy, and it will get worse if they don’t fix it).

          • Gay Veteran

            try explaining why so many jobs were shipped to China, India, Vietnam, etc.

          • John Pryce

            You might also remember that they passed the 16th Amendment in peacetime, prior to any proposed expansion of the government (or any war that might require it), and raised tariffs alongside it.
            You might also notice that I said “effectively zero”, not ACTUALLY zero. I mean return the tariff to its original status as a revenue-generating tax. As a revenue-generating tax, it tends to bring in more money by being low than it does by being high. A tariff of $0.01 on all goods would end up bringing in many times more money than a $100 tariff, because more people would end up paying it.

          • Gay Veteran

            the tariff would depend on labor arbitrage and environmental arbitrage

      • John Pryce

        Besides which, the point was about the rich who EARN their fortunes, not the ones who basically steal them. Gates, Jobs, Dell, Glock, Walton, Rockefeller, Vanderbilt, Morgan…. these men EARNED their fortunes. Men like Harry Reid (not rich when he became a senator, now has $100 million) stole or defrauded their way into wealth. Not the same thing.

        • Gay Veteran

          Walton? An expert in importing cheap products made in China.
          Agreed that politicians in general.

          • John Pryce

            …. And? Why do I care where he gets his retail products?

          • Gay Veteran

            Wal-Mart is a key component in the off-shoring of American jobs

          • Anonymous

            I care. I do not want to support a system, by purchasing those goods, where some of the workers are so miserable that the company had to put up suicide nets to catch the workers flinging themselves from the windows.

            Human rights aside, if you just want to debate Capitalism, how can the USA compete with countries that pay slave wages? How does the USA compete with countries that have a much different, lower cost of living?

          • John Pryce

            Actually that’s an easy question.

            But you will have to wait until tomorrow evening for me to answer, because right now I have to shower and sleep.

      • Randy Townsend

        Yep, you’re right. So, let the feds seize every penny from the unworthy (after all, they don’t deserve it because they didn’t earn it) and create yet another government program designed to “assist” those in need (they didn’t earn it either, but that’s different) …. Personal responsibility is an antiquated concept – we’ve evolved to the point where making the underclass a permanent fixture is seen as a good thing to do (just as long as they pull the “D” lever).

        • Gay Veteran

          The Wall Street banksters committed massive fraud and all their assets should be seized before they head to jail.
          And the underclass being a permanent fixture is because BOTH parties serve TPTB.

          • John Pryce

            Actually they didn’t commit massive fraud; that was done by racial political activists in the early 90s, responding to what proved to be a fraudulent study by the New England branch of the Federal Reserve that claimed that banks were giving out mortgage loans on a racial basis.
            The study was shredded within a span of weeks, but it gave political activists with an axe to grind enough ammunition to get then-President Clinton to sign new regulations into law in line with the Community Reinvestment Act of 1977, with the purpose of forcing these banks to give more mortgage loans to minorities and lower-income people. In order to sell this to the mortgage banks, increased funding and authority to buy bad and ‘subprime’ loans was granted to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. This meant that granting these loans and selling them to Fannie Mae was guaranteed profit for banks, so they went along with the political scheme (note that some banks saw this for what it was and wisely stayed out of it, BB&T being one of the prime examples).
            Basically, the economic crisis of 2008 was the belated cost of an early 90s vote-buying scheme by Bill Clinton, who managed to foist off the cost onto the taxpayer.
            He didn’t create the situation, admittedly, but he most certainly took advantage of it. And Congressman Barney Frank and Senator Chris Dodd, who were in charge of overseeing the program, resisted every kind of oversight and proposed reform for the project for the entire duration, including numerous attempts by former President Bush to reform the finances of the program in order to keep it solvent.
            Ironically, Wall Street usually gives 90+% of its political donations to Democrats.

          • Gay Veteran

            Community Reinvestment Act of 1977? and yet those financial institutions NOT covered by it also engaged in fraud.
            you can look the banksters boots all you want, but you might want to go over to Karl Denninger’s website (he was one of the founders of the Tea Party movement) and see how he documents the massive amounts of fraud by the banksters

          • John Pryce

            “Looking the banksters boots”? I will presume you meant “licking”.
            And the real enemies aren’t bankers, it’s politicians who seek to manipulate markets for political gain. They usually do this through what Milton Friedman called “rent-seeking” behaviors and policies.
            This is less about defending banks and more about placing the blame where it’s due. In this case the blame falls on politicians who thought to buy the votes of low-information voters with taxpayer funds.

          • Gay Veteran

            sorry, but fascism is the merger of state AND corporate power, so quit trying to just blame government.

          • John Pryce

            And it comes as a result of politicians, not businessmen. Remember who holds the guns in the relationship between business and government.

          • Gay Veteran

            and who gives the bribes….oh, I’m sorry, contributions to the politicians? it takes BOTH

          • John Pryce

            Would they bother if those politicians didn’t have guns, and power over the livelihoods of all those people who work at/own those corporations?
            It is not to their credit that some businessmen play along with this political game, but it begins and ends with political power.

          • Anonymous

            Applause.

          • John Pryce

            More importantly, my real point is that we don’t need to believe or assume malicious intentions on the part of those who cause hard. Their specific dispositions are, in fact, completely irrelevant. Whether they meant harm, or simply meant good and didn’t realize their means would cause harm, the result is the same.
            If anything, the desire to do good – when lacking the good judgment to see the probable harm from the particular means of attempting to do good – is the real danger, since the greatest harm often results from the best of intentions.

          • Gay Veteran

            “More importantly, my real point is that we don’t need to believe or assume malicious intentions on the part of those who cause hard….”
            I assume you meant “harm”.
            Goldman Sachs is the best example of today’s “capitalism”

      • Anonymous

        Right on.

  • Mondobeyondo

    I’m not angry at the wealthy who legitimately earned their wealth through hard work and struggle. They were blessed with their wealth by God.

    However, a great deal of today’s wealthy got their wealth through unethical means. One of many examples: Bernie Madoff. These people were blessed with their wealth by Satan.

    You see, God promises wealth by perseverance, faith and devotion to Him. The devil promises quick and speedy wealth by lying, cheating, stealing, taking your clothes off in a video, etc. That’s how you can tell who got their wealth by honest means, and who did not. The wealthy people behind the New World Odor (yes, that’s deliberately misspelled) got their wealth unethically.

    • Kelly

      With this mindset one must conclude that:

      Those that got wealthy through hard work and honesty were rewarded by God and those that got wealthy through lying, cheating and stealing were rewarded by Satan.

      What about good people who work hard and are honest and never get ahead? Why does God pick and choose? The answer: He doesn’t. Thinking God gives certain people more than others is a christian fantasy.

      People get wealthy because they: take risks, work hard, are in the right place at the right time, are persistent, lie, deceive, etc, etc….there are many paths to monetary riches.

      The wealth God speaks of has nothing to do with money as God is never concerned about your financial condition but rather your spiritual condition.

    • Bill

      So very true

  • Mondobeyondo

    “Let me tell you the story, *bout a cat named Bill
    Poor country kitty, barely kept his tummy fill”*
    ————————————
    There’s always been poverty and the poor. It was true 2,000 years ago, and it’s true (maybe even more so) today. If you’re counting on government to end economic disparity, you’ll be waiting a long time. Satan will be a-skatin’, because hell will have frozen over by then.

    Government can certainly help in the short term, but too many people make welfare and assistance a lifestyle. That’s not the answer.
    _____________________
    *From Berke Breathed’s now defunct comic strip, “Bloom County”

  • jrex918

    i can’t stress this enough; support the venus project! no more money, no more politics, no more slavery; there is no more money so people cant abuse it and everything is free so there will be no more poverty and suffering

  • Bruce

    What is coming can not be imagined even during your worst nightmare. Millions starving, murder by the thousands on a daily baisis. People willing to kill for a slice of bread, woman prostituting themselves for a can of spam. Taking your turn everynight to stand guard over what you have hopefully stowed away. Trying to make due without electricity.
    Crying your heart out and living through gut wrenching agony and dealing with unbelievable grief because your mate can not get medical teatment or the loss of your child through senseless violence.
    The enviroment being so unsafe you can’t even travel down the highway even if you had some fuel. Hearing stories of millions of elderly sitting on the street curbs begging for some food, just a single morsel of substanence.
    Watching every resemblence of society disappear. The police will quit and go home because at some point to stay will be a suicide mission. Not to mention they are needed much more a home to provide safety and security for their own families. The same with the military. The government is all but non exisitent and it truly will be each man for himself.
    To say it will be tough times is a gross understatement. However, there is some good news. After and only after all those who would steal, kill and rape because the world has seemingly gone mad are killed off then some resemblence of humanity and community will resurface. It will start slowly with small pockets of bartering within some communities. I don’t think in our lifetimes we will ever get back to where we were in the 70′s, 80′s and 90′s. However, after what we are going through any light and hope will be a blessing.
    I accept that many of you may disagree with my very bleak assesment of the carnage yet to come and the degree of such. But, how can it really be any different? If you think people are going to just sit in their doorways and starve to death then you have another think coming! ! !

    • El Pollo de Oro

      Bruce: I think you might be even more pessimistic than I am, which is saying a lot. And no, people who are truly desperate are not “going to just sit in their doorways and starve to death.” Desperate people do desperate things, none of them pleasant. And when their victims find themselves bound and gagged in the trunk of a car in a Third World slum, they don’t say, “I am an exceptionalist.” They say, “Dear God, please help me.”

      • Anonymous

        As the old military saying goes:

        “There are no atheists in foxholes.”

        • El Pollo de Oro

          There are no atheists in foxholes, and there are no atheists in the car trunks of kidnappers in the slums of Guatemala City.

  • todd

    Such articles as this remind me of the words of Jesus – “What does it profit a man if he gain the whole world and lose his soul?”

    Another sobering thought: many of us seem to think that *we* do better if we were in the position of these banksters, corporate crooks and G o v t elite;
    that, somehow, our superior stock of humanity, our towering virtue, our most conscionable character, would succeed within the powerful vortex and the world of overwhelming temptations where these people are sucked right in.

    And so, while he hold deep disdain for bad principle, there’s no need to bash personality. We’re all made of the same stuff.

    God alone – His goodness and grace, is what keeps us. :-)

    Learn wild edibles.

  • Anonymous

    “Do not remove the old landmarks.” Deut 19:14 and Prov 22:28

    I think books count as old landmarks as many of them mark history.

  • EdwardUlyssesCate

    Good commentary. Now you see why the 1889 book “The Great Red Dragon: Foreign Money Power In The United States” contained their goal:
    “To own the earth in fee-simple.” Until the money printing was ramped up, I didn’t know how they’d do it. Now it’s obvious.

  • 2Gary2

    As soon as the large number of low information conservatives stop voting against their economic self- interest, which they do in the mistaken belief these conservatives they vote for give a rip about their silly little social conservative agenda, we will then see change. I am not holding my breath as the sheer depth of stupidity of the average conservative is almost beyond belief.

    See below:

    In both California in 2012 and in Minnesota last May, activists won
    significant revenue-generating tax increases on incomes over $250,000.
    In both states, anti-austerity campaigns stressed that those who’ve
    “benefited from the policies that sparked the financial meltdown —
    corporations and the rich — must pay for the public deficits it
    produced.”

    Yes folks we need to heavily tax the rich and spread the wealth.

  • 2Gary2

    Stupid conservatives-this is the productivity theft the rich have stolen from workers and why taxing them hard is not theft.

    If the nation’s minimum wage had kept pace with that increase, a New York Times breakdown points out, America’s lowest-paid workers would now be laboring at no less than $22.62 per hour.

    • Smarter than Gary

      Hey, why stop at $22.62? Why not make the minimum wage $2,450 per hour? Answer: you can not. The minimum wage pushes small business into bankruptcy, it increases the prices of nearly everything, and it causes inflation….you communist.

      • 12Gary2

        typical straw man argument and right wing nut talking point. No one is saying raise the minimum wage to 2450 per hour. Back to reality –work should pay.

        • John Pryce

          Okay, so what is the limiting principle?
          Under what circumstances would you favor reducing the legally-required minimum wage to zero?

      • Drud

        Gary is correct in calling your argument a straw man, however, you both miss the point: the issue is not that government isn’t doing enough to help the poor and middle class, nor is it that corporations are evil and stealing from the poor and middle class. The point is that government interests have merged with corporate interests to make Benito Mussolini’s ideal fascist state. The Tea Party (anti-government) and the Occupy Movement (anti-corporation) are really ON THE SAME SIDE. But you see how easily the elitist debunked both movements and painted them to be opposites. Divide and conger 101 and the American public bought it hook, line and sinker.

        • Anonymous

          Excellent post. I really enjoy your posts. You always offer an interesting debate.

    • Drud

      That’s just the point, Gary. The currency is unsound, so how does one define value. I can say I make 7 trillion flarnots/hour. So what is a flarnot worth? Whatever goods or services for which I can exchange them. Money is just keeping score. Those that understand that have robbed from those that don’t. The answer is not to “vote” to “raise taxes” on the rich (who happen to be the ones that truly understand the nature of money and also, they also control the lawmakers) so that we can raise the “minimum wage.” You do that and prices will simply raise accordingly. What must happen is people must learn the nature of money so at least we can combat those who would rule over us, and believe me, those ultra-rich, scum-sucking, corporate-type that you despise so much, also include nearly every politician in Washington, even those that happen to have a D next to their name.

  • k

    While his comment was extreme one end, your comment is extreme on the other end.

    Criticising all men for bad deeds not all of them do, is just as wrong as criticising all women for deeds not all women do

    • Anonymous

      Seems like I said “many men.” Please point out where the opinion/comment above stated “all men.”

      • k

        I never said you said ‘all men’.

        The last paragraph… ”In my opinion men have clearly won the grand prize on ”how to be a whore.” indicates your criticism of all men.

        • Anonymous

          “Criticising all men” means you never said that I said “all men?”

          Well, I am confused.

          I should have stated “many men” several more times to make it clear that I was only sharing my opinion about “many men.” I was only sharing opinions about the “many men” that seem to be lumps of coal. I was not sharing opinions about the few diamonds that exist among the coal. The opinions were only about “many men” but not about all men.

          Thank you for correcting me. I am still learning.

          • k

            I mean i never said you used the particular words ‘all men’

            And you are right, you should have used the word ‘many men’ several more times!

  • Tim

    I never got a job from a poor guy. I need the rich to employ me, I need the rich to save their money in banks so I can borrow their money and buy a house.

    • JasonD

      You don’t need to borrow their money. thanks to the evil “fractional reserve” banking system, the bank will simply create the money for your loan out of thin air and charge you interest on it.

    • JahRW

      Um…did you know in the 1950s, most likely your yearly salary was more than your house? So the transfer of the wealth from the to the banks have happened.. If shared in the wealth of the nation, you wouldn’t need a loan.

  • Hammerstrike

    I think millions across the world are awakened already.
    But for now, they are still learning, they lack organization and leadership, not mentionning the numbers needed to really get things moving.

    But this point is approching much faster than just 8 years ago.

  • Rob W

    It’s not all bad news. There is a chance, albeit small, that the people may sieze the power from the elites, and build a better, more equitable reality.

  • seawolf14

    hi Michael and EC bloggers,
    according to nro if you have a penny in your pocket you have amassed more wealth then the bottom quarter of good ol ripoff USAinc’s population combined. Im a rich man in third world Marxist multiracial post Amerika.
    protect yourself at all times 14/5

  • RealityBetraysUs@gmail.com

    Warning to Rich Oppressors

    1 Now listen, you rich
    people, weep and wail because of the misery that is
    coming upon you. 2 Your wealth has rotted, and moths have eaten your clothes. 3 Your gold and silver are corroded. Their corrosion will testify
    against you and eat your flesh like fire. You have hoarded wealth in the last
    days. 4 Look! The wages you failed to pay the workmen
    who mowed your fields are crying out against you. The cries of
    the harvesters have reached the ears of the Lord Almighty. 5 You
    have lived on earth in luxury and self-indulgence. You have fattened yourselves in the day of slaughter. 6 You have
    condemned and murdered innocent men, who were not
    opposing you.

    Patience in Suffering

    7 Be patient, then, brothers, until
    the Lord’s coming. See how the farmer waits for the land to
    yield its valuable crop and how patient he is for the autumn and
    spring rains. 8 You too, be patient and stand firm, because the
    Lord’s coming is near. 9 Don’t grumble against
    each other, brothers, or you will be judged. The Judge is standing at the door!

  • SMASH THE CONTROL MACHINE

    HEY MICHAEL!PROPANE IS BREATHING ON 4 BUCKS A GALLON HERE IN KANSAS!!!THAT WOULD COST ME 1000 A MONTH TO HEAT MY HOME !!!OUCH !!!GLAD I GOT A LOT OF WOOD!!!

  • John Pryce

    I do hereby declare that none of the people on here decrying the “rich” have EVER owned a business, or otherwise been involved in the executive or management side of running one.
    Seeing comments like “the wages you failed to pay us” makes me laugh at the idea of that person owning a business.

    • Anonymous

      Isn’t that James 5 from the bible?

      • John Pryce

        No idea. I was simply imagining the look on my father’s face at this comment.

    • Gay Veteran

      oic, so you can’t comment on our current fascism without having been a business owner

      • John Pryce

        My father was a business owner for many years, and frankly I’m not sorry I take his side in this debate.

      • John Pryce

        And actually I was saying that these people only ever look at one side of the situation. They usually spare no mental effort trying to discern whether the other side has anything legitimate to say, oftentimes because the very idea of being JUSTLY held accountable for something is alien to them.

  • ANuVoyce

    It’s True, it’s Unfair, and if you live your life around this truth then you are part of it. Realize that the real truth is, it does not matter. Your life, its function, your day to day activity is only ruled by money if you allow it to be true. Money is a tool, it is by no means the only tool you need to live. Fact is, the earth can provide everything you need without money, like it has before and will again. Try to not worry about money you don’t have, or who has it, instead find ways to not have to use it. Take it out of your life. Be creative, recycle, share, trade, your friends and family and neighbors. Products and Services are commodities that do not have to be purchased with money. If we become aware of the fact that we all need very little to live, we will realize that there is in fact already an abundance of everything. Every person does not need a lawn mower that is used for 1 hour per week. Share. No-one needs 100 pair of shoes, some of which you don’t wear because they are classic. There are simple solutions that do not require the rich or their money, in fact, the rest of us, are probably better off without them. They can only teach you greed and how to make money, a system that is failing all of mankind. Leave them to their toys and let the rest of us share a world that is full of people who care, for the world, for each other, for life.

  • Errol Flynn

    Jesus is not returning. The Bible, Koran & any other religious book you can think of are works of fiction. The reason these so called “Elites” have so much money is because there are so many gullible people on this planet.

    • Kendrick_Dooley

      Err..what?

  • Mike Lashewitz

    When does one have too much wealth? When people in the world are starving and crimes against humanity by these very wealthy people continue. There is a disease on this planet and that is the disease of sociopathic wealthy criminals. There is no excuse for allowing this to continue.

  • LITOSWEED

    There is only one way !
    That way is “TAKE IT BACK”
    We are the farmers and builders and mechanics, Doctors ect… They need us, we don’t need them !
    The Parasite cannot survive without the host, without sustenance they will die !

  • Robert Zraick

    This is a very good article, and I have read through the posted discussions and find some really good comments.

    Regarding everything from definitions of wealth, resources, currency, trade, capitalism, corporatism, the list is exhaustive.

    I think the average person is living in a form of slavery. Just laboring to survive. Thinking that if they work harder, they will earn more wealth. All their time is spent in the pursuit of survival and perhaps a few toys and diversions if they can manage it, but many are taught that they can have more by going into debt.

    This is a way to insure more poverty in the long run. Even without the debt, people have to work harder and harder for less and less. This is by design of the elite who are in fact slave masters.

    But if people really understood money, and how the western banking system works, they would be headed for the banks and central government buildings with torches, pitchforks and guns. This may happen when things get so bad that the truth will become obvious.

    Right now the elite is trying to manipulate the masses into class warfare. After making so many people poor, they now want the poor to hate the rich. I distinguish between the rich who earn their wealth, and the elite who steal their wealth.
    The poor actually want to get richer. But somehow they want to steal from the rich who have earned it, and adopt the philosophies of theft which is used by the elite.

    This is all madness. Until we have a philosophical awakening, we will continue to descend into a new dark age.

    Things are going to get worse. The elite are lower than criminals. The are sub human by any standard of measurement. Even though I believe that the term “evil” is a judgment call, I would make an exception and say the elite are truly evil.

    They will gladly kill us. We must understand this. We need to get rid of them. I mean get rid of them by any and every means possible.

    They are the source of death, war, famine, poverty and suffering in this world. The world is now being ruled by the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse.

    This will not go on forever. It will and must come to an end.

  • Anita Railing

    This is capitalism at its finest, the American dream, work hard get paid, suck it up Ayn Rand lovers, get ready to lick jackboots, enjoy

    • John Pryce

      The LA times issued a correction to the article that is functionally a retraction. The top 85 wealthiest people own, collectively, 0.7% of the world’s wealth, not 50%. 0.7% is, however, the same amount that the bottom half of the world owns, so that part of the article was true. But they should change the headline to reflect the correction, and they haven’t, probably because they think like you.

  • illminati

    Do you want to become a great man or woman in the world?, do you need real money and execs of money, if yes then kindly get back to us now so that we can show you the way to make money in life, this is the chance for you to become a great member of the illuminati kingdom so that you can get all you needs in life, kindly email us back now so that we can proceed with your request and also we can fulfilled your dream and grant you your heart desire. email us now at: illuminatikingdom@hotmail.com

Emergency Essentials/BePrepared
Agora Financial
Thrive Life
FEMA Hates This

Austin Coins
Family Survival Plan - Check This Out!
High Blood Pressure?
The End Of America?
MHAdNew_125x125 copy(1)
FINCA BAYANO
Survive After Collapse
cheaper to burn dollars than paper

Silver.com

Camping Survival
Facebook Twitter More...