Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Snarkoleptic

(5,997 posts)
Tue Feb 21, 2012, 11:51 PM Feb 2012

Hate to be impolite, but we must now eat the rich to further our economic recovery.

Last edited Wed Feb 22, 2012, 12:56 AM - Edit history (1)

What I mean is that the excessive accumulation of resources (wealth) tends to choke out new growth and must be addressed to achieve sustainable economic growth.

On a macroeconomic level, the excessive accumulation of capital tends to have the following negative consequences-
1) The velocity of money is decreased. Money is accumulated and taken out of circulation, acting as a damper on our economy.
2) The accumulators use their wealth and influence to further tilt the table for their personal benefit (see #1 above).
3) Excessive accumulation seems to foster the growth of sociopaths (or is it the other way 'round), either way...same ill...same cure.
Exhibit A- Koch Brothers (parasites) and Alice Walton ($21billion net worth) DUI photo from October 2011

?cda6c1
Alright...mebbe Alice is not a sociopath like the Koch's, but she seems to be a net negative to our society.

In nature we see the same in mature forests, which require a natural forest fire burn cycle to remain healthy-
1) Nutrients are increasingly accumulated by larger trees. The soil becomes more and more alkaline, which is inherently inhospitable to new growth.
2) The forest floor is deprived of sunlight and we see more growth in the big trees (see #1 above).
3) Excessive accumulation all but chokes out new growth as the canopy becomes higher and soil less viable (or is it the other way 'round), either way...same ill...same cure.

As a forest must burn in order to release nutrients back into the environment, the rich must be (eaten) made to release their wealth back into society.
Exhibit B-

13 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Hate to be impolite, but we must now eat the rich to further our economic recovery. (Original Post) Snarkoleptic Feb 2012 OP
Is that seance kitty? lonestarnot Feb 2012 #1
Seance kitteh finds Koch bothers to be an odd combo of greasy, gristly and totaly unapalatable. Snarkoleptic Feb 2012 #2
Well, the rich have been eating away at... stillwaiting Feb 2012 #3
Makes me wonder how and why the idea of the jubilee was done-away with. Snarkoleptic Feb 2012 #5
Might Have Been Impossible to Get a Loan after About Year 40 AndyTiedye Feb 2012 #7
Way Too Much Cholesterol. A Big Mac Would Have a Lower Fat Content Than Those Guys AndyTiedye Feb 2012 #4
Alice is prolly doughy and greasy as well. Snarkoleptic Feb 2012 #6
I agree guitar man Feb 2012 #8
And a nice bernaise sauce as well. Snarkoleptic Feb 2012 #12
Yes, I've been surprised how slow people have been to come to this conclusion dreamnightwind Feb 2012 #9
Taxing inheritance as income would be a good start. Incitatus Feb 2012 #10
Yawn. You mean, time to talk about it. Duer 157099 Feb 2012 #11
Why not quit yawning... dreamnightwind Feb 2012 #13

stillwaiting

(3,795 posts)
3. Well, the rich have been eating away at...
Wed Feb 22, 2012, 12:32 AM
Feb 2012

...the middle class, working class, and poor without much resistance the past 4 decades so I'd say that fair's fair.

Even Warren Buffet will admit it's what's been happening.

Most of the wealthy elite are more committed than ever to continue taking from the middle class, working class, and poor to further their vulgar consumption.

They know what they've been doing, and what the consequences are of what they continue to lobby for. They do not care about us. At all. The game is severely rigged in their favor, they know it, and they love it that way. Again, they don't care about our well being at all.

Why should we care about theirs?

Edited to add:

This is a matter of life and death for so many Americans, and if things continue down the path we've been on it will be a matter of life and death for many, many more. People will die because they do not have the proper access to basic necessities of life because these greedy assholes are psychopathic.

Snarkoleptic

(5,997 posts)
5. Makes me wonder how and why the idea of the jubilee was done-away with.
Wed Feb 22, 2012, 12:47 AM
Feb 2012

I mean, leveling the field every 49-50 years is much like a forest fire returning nutrients to the soil.
Right now I sense the allegorical vibe of a California community built on the edge of wilderness and allowing the brush to build to a tinderbox.
The lack of an occasional controlled burn always seems to result in a catastrophic and all-consuming fire.
Geez, I sound like Chauncey Gardner. (Peter Sellers character in "Being There&quot

AndyTiedye

(23,500 posts)
7. Might Have Been Impossible to Get a Loan after About Year 40
Wed Feb 22, 2012, 01:48 AM
Feb 2012

Who'd loan anybody money if they knew the "Jubilee" was coming in a year or two and they'd never get it back?

Snarkoleptic

(5,997 posts)
6. Alice is prolly doughy and greasy as well.
Wed Feb 22, 2012, 12:50 AM
Feb 2012

May also taste like a mixture of bourbon and rubbing alcohol...at least I suspect.

dreamnightwind

(4,775 posts)
9. Yes, I've been surprised how slow people have been to come to this conclusion
Wed Feb 22, 2012, 02:14 AM
Feb 2012

We're way too top-heavy as a society, to the point that things no longer function as they are supposed to. So yes, it is time to radically redistribute wealth downward.

What's the right mechanism to do so? I don't know, that's the big question. I'm averse to violence. The tax code has some possibilities, but it has to be radical change, a la Roosevelt, not the timid proposed changes we're getting from Obama.

Better ways? I'm all ears, but regardless of the method, this has to happen, and the sooner the better.

I also think the for-profit model is used for way too many things, and has a lot to do with movement of wealth upwards. There's absolutely no reason for profit to have any role in healthcare or prisons. I would go further and say that applies to any kind of insurance, there's no reason insurance can't be a zero-sum game, where people buy insurance and their premiums, minus the reasonable salaries of the insurance overseers, are used for nothing but paying out on claims.

Slowing down the movement of money would help, too. Rapid computerized trading does nothing but skim money from the market, and it's the big players that are mostly doing the rapid computerized trading.

Incitatus

(5,317 posts)
10. Taxing inheritance as income would be a good start.
Wed Feb 22, 2012, 02:25 AM
Feb 2012


Changes in the corporate tax code that encourage corporations to stop outsourcing and pay their employees a decent wage would also help.

I agree with you about the for-profit model, but I fear things will have to get a lot worse before enough people realize drastic changes have to be made.

Duer 157099

(17,742 posts)
11. Yawn. You mean, time to talk about it.
Wed Feb 22, 2012, 02:42 AM
Feb 2012

I'll be long dead before anyone actually *does* anything about it.

Seems we all know the solution and yet it doesn't happen. Guess we'll just have to wait til lightening strikes to start the fire, just like nature does.

dreamnightwind

(4,775 posts)
13. Why not quit yawning...
Wed Feb 22, 2012, 06:34 PM
Feb 2012

and help spark up some lightening, then? If you're sincere, that is. It's later than you think, the time is now.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Hate to be impolite, but ...