Ok, I'm a businessman, and I'm at the top 1% of wealth in my area. Currently, I'm most likely in the top 5-10% in overall America. I've come from asian-immigrant parents living here in "poverty" to living lavishly. I just took what my father said to me and continued on that path. He said to me, "To have a huge amount of money, you must take huge amounts of risks." At first I didn't get what he meant until I was grown up, due to the typical asian-parenting. Do good in school, go to a good college, get a good job. That's basically the safe way of living life. What I realized was, becoming rich requires taking opportunities and the risks involved. "Every choice and every opportunity you make in life is an investment in one form or another."
I see America as the land of opportunity, not as the land of guarantee. The top is called the top for a reason. The wealth distribution is competitive by nature, because we are all competing with each other to better our lives. Some people just want to be at the top more than others, and will do basically anything to get there. Know that to become more rich, someone else has to become more poor, whether from the top, middle, or bottom in terms of distribution and proportion. Since it is so competitive, do some people have what it takes to compete?
Most rich people know what the playing field is. Rich compete with the rich, trying to be better themselves from one another. They do not like newcomers, because that is just more competition they have already have to compete with. If you are trying to get to the top in the same field as people who are already established in it, then you must take opportunities from them to rise above them. That is why usually the rich band together to try to keep other competitors away and only compete with each other. Rich people usually seek any opportunity to gain an advantage no matter the risks involved. That is just how the mind-set is to the rich. No matter what the laws or regulations are, people who want it enough to be at the top will take opportunities and risks to be at the top.
That being said, most people don't want to take the risks associated with the opportunities to become rich. Note that as you become more wealthier, your financial risks become less and less. That's why the rich become more rich, and the poor become more poor. I'd bet most people just want to live a more safer lifestyle, however if you're mature enough to realize this, safety is never guaranteed in life. Because of the competitive nature of wealth distribution of a "free market," other people will take the opportunities you decided not to take to have a chance to move to the top. There are many missed opportunities people have in life, and someone else is going to take them, because they're willing to risk it. It's a dog eat dog world out there.
You don't have to buy and use goods and services from the rich. It's not like they're forcing you with a gun to your head. If you don't like it or the price, don't buy it. However, most people usually find it an annoyance and settle with buying it anyways. If you hate or dislike the rich so much, why not invest yourself to compete with them? Yes it's a risky venture trying to form a business against them, but you're giving no competition if you don't try at all.
I don't really get why Obama wants to tax the rich, as that does not solve the problem. The rich control the market, what do you think they're going to do if he taxed them... They're going to raise prices to compensate. The only way to really combat the rich is take that step and compete in their market.
On November 06 2011 06:18 Pleiades wrote: Ok, I'm a businessman, and I'm at the top 1% of wealth in my area. Currently, I'm most likely in the top 5-10% in overall America. I've come from asian-immigrant parents living here in "poverty" to living lavishly. I just took what my father said to me and continued on that path. He said to me, "To have a huge amount of money, you must take huge amounts of risks." At first I didn't get what he meant until I was grown up, due to the typical asian-parenting. Do good in school, go to a good college, get a good job. That's basically the safe way of living life. What I realized was, becoming rich requires taking opportunities and the risks involved. "Every choice and every opportunity you make in life is an investment in one form or another."
I see America as the land of opportunity, not as the land of guarantee. The top is called the top for a reason. The wealth distribution is competitive by nature, because we are all competing with each other to better our lives. Some people just want to be at the top more than others, and will do basically anything to get there. Know that to become more rich, someone else has to become more poor, whether from the top, middle, or bottom in terms of distribution and proportion. Since it is so competitive, do some people have what it takes to compete?
Most rich people know what the playing field is. Rich compete with the rich, trying to be better themselves from one another. They do not like newcomers, because that is just more competition they have already have to compete with. If you are trying to get to the top in the same field as people who are already established in it, then you must take opportunities from them to rise above them. That is why usually the rich band together to try to keep other competitors away and only compete with each other. Rich people usually seek any opportunity to gain an advantage no matter the risks involved. That is just how the mind-set is to the rich. No matter what the laws or regulations are, people who want it enough to be at the top will take opportunities and risks to be at the top.
That being said, most people don't want to take the risks associated with the opportunities to become rich. Note that as you become more wealthier, your financial risks become less and less. That's why the rich become more rich, and the poor become more poor. I'd bet most people just want to live a more safer lifestyle, however if you're mature enough to realize this, safety is never guaranteed in life. Because of the competitive nature of wealth distribution of a "free market," other people will take the opportunities you decided not to take to have a chance to move to the top. There are many missed opportunities people have in life, and someone else is going to take them, because they're willing to risk it. It's a dog eat dog world out there.
You don't have to buy and use goods and services from the rich. It's not like they're forcing you with a gun to your head. If you don't like it or the price, don't buy it. However, most people usually find it an annoyance and settle with buying it anyways. If you hate or dislike the rich so much, why not invest yourself to compete with them? Yes it's a risky venture trying to form a business against them, but you're giving no competition if you don't try at all.
I don't really get why Obama wants to tax the rich, as that does not solve the problem. The rich control the market, what do you think they're going to do if he taxed them... They're going to raise prices to compensate. The only way to really combat the rich is take that step and compete in their market.
Amen brother. I am not rich, but I understand how the market works unlike Obama.
On November 06 2011 06:18 Pleiades wrote: Ok, I'm a businessman, and I'm at the top 1% of wealth in my area. Currently, I'm most likely in the top 5-10% in overall America. I've come from asian-immigrant parents living here in "poverty" to living lavishly. I just took what my father said to me and continued on that path. He said to me, "To have a huge amount of money, you must take huge amounts of risks." At first I didn't get what he meant until I was grown up, due to the typical asian-parenting. Do good in school, go to a good college, get a good job. That's basically the safe way of living life. What I realized was, becoming rich requires taking opportunities and the risks involved. "Every choice and every opportunity you make in life is an investment in one form or another."
I see America as the land of opportunity, not as the land of guarantee. The top is called the top for a reason. The wealth distribution is competitive by nature, because we are all competing with each other to better our lives. Some people just want to be at the top more than others, and will do basically anything to get there. Know that to become more rich, someone else has to become more poor, whether from the top, middle, or bottom in terms of distribution and proportion. Since it is so competitive, do some people have what it takes to compete?
Most rich people know what the playing field is. Rich compete with the rich, trying to be better themselves from one another. They do not like newcomers, because that is just more competition they have already have to compete with. If you are trying to get to the top in the same field as people who are already established in it, then you must take opportunities from them to rise above them. That is why usually the rich band together to try to keep other competitors away and only compete with each other. Rich people usually seek any opportunity to gain an advantage no matter the risks involved. That is just how the mind-set is to the rich. No matter what the laws or regulations are, people who want it enough to be at the top will take opportunities and risks to be at the top.
That being said, most people don't want to take the risks associated with the opportunities to become rich. Note that as you become more wealthier, your financial risks become less and less. That's why the rich become more rich, and the poor become more poor. I'd bet most people just want to live a more safer lifestyle, however if you're mature enough to realize this, safety is never guaranteed in life. Because of the competitive nature of wealth distribution of a "free market," other people will take the opportunities you decided not to take to have a chance to move to the top. There are many missed opportunities people have in life, and someone else is going to take them, because they're willing to risk it. It's a dog eat dog world out there.
You don't have to buy and use goods and services from the rich. It's not like they're forcing you with a gun to your head. If you don't like it or the price, don't buy it. However, most people usually find it an annoyance and settle with buying it anyways. If you hate or dislike the rich so much, why not invest yourself to compete with them? Yes it's a risky venture trying to form a business against them, but you're giving no competition if you don't try at all.
I don't really get why Obama wants to tax the rich, as that does not solve the problem. The rich control the market, what do you think they're going to do if he taxed them... They're going to raise prices to compensate. The only way to really combat the rich is take that step and compete in their market.
EXACTLY. Thank you for this. You have to become wealthy and then redistribute that. Essentially a robin hood-esque act, but theoretically effective. At least that's my plan. I'm already heavily investing (wouldn't want to take money from smaller businesses) and once I obtain wealth I'm simply going to redistribute it. Now just imagine if more people did that on a larger scale. I feel like it would work. At least unarguably more-so than fucking camping on the street and feeling great about myself while actually accomplishing nothing.
On November 06 2011 06:18 Pleiades wrote: Ok, I'm a businessman, and I'm at the top 1% of wealth in my area. Currently, I'm most likely in the top 5-10% in overall America. I've come from asian-immigrant parents living here in "poverty" to living lavishly. I just took what my father said to me and continued on that path. He said to me, "To have a huge amount of money, you must take huge amounts of risks." At first I didn't get what he meant until I was grown up, due to the typical asian-parenting. Do good in school, go to a good college, get a good job. That's basically the safe way of living life. What I realized was, becoming rich requires taking opportunities and the risks involved. "Every choice and every opportunity you make in life is an investment in one form or another."
I see America as the land of opportunity, not as the land of guarantee. The top is called the top for a reason. The wealth distribution is competitive by nature, because we are all competing with each other to better our lives. Some people just want to be at the top more than others, and will do basically anything to get there. Know that to become more rich, someone else has to become more poor, whether from the top, middle, or bottom in terms of distribution and proportion. Since it is so competitive, do some people have what it takes to compete?
Most rich people know what the playing field is. Rich compete with the rich, trying to be better themselves from one another. They do not like newcomers, because that is just more competition they have already have to compete with. If you are trying to get to the top in the same field as people who are already established in it, then you must take opportunities from them to rise above them. That is why usually the rich band together to try to keep other competitors away and only compete with each other. Rich people usually seek any opportunity to gain an advantage no matter the risks involved. That is just how the mind-set is to the rich. No matter what the laws or regulations are, people who want it enough to be at the top will take opportunities and risks to be at the top.
That being said, most people don't want to take the risks associated with the opportunities to become rich. Note that as you become more wealthier, your financial risks become less and less. That's why the rich become more rich, and the poor become more poor. I'd bet most people just want to live a more safer lifestyle, however if you're mature enough to realize this, safety is never guaranteed in life. Because of the competitive nature of wealth distribution of a "free market," other people will take the opportunities you decided not to take to have a chance to move to the top. There are many missed opportunities people have in life, and someone else is going to take them, because they're willing to risk it. It's a dog eat dog world out there.
You don't have to buy and use goods and services from the rich. It's not like they're forcing you with a gun to your head. If you don't like it or the price, don't buy it. However, most people usually find it an annoyance and settle with buying it anyways. If you hate or dislike the rich so much, why not invest yourself to compete with them? Yes it's a risky venture trying to form a business against them, but you're giving no competition if you don't try at all.
I don't really get why Obama wants to tax the rich, as that does not solve the problem. The rich control the market, what do you think they're going to do if he taxed them... They're going to raise prices to compensate. The only way to really combat the rich is take that step and compete in their market.
On April 04 2011 15:54 Pleiades wrote: I'm from south sac, but I'm currently going to school in the bay area. I don't play much, because I can't afford a good gaming comp since school is eating my funds. Basically I just like to spectate people playing each other. Don't know if I can make it to the Intel LANFest this weekend. 100th post
That's cool of you, in 6 months you graduated from school and became super rich good for you. Ofc going over your posting history it comes up with interesting bits on one hand your a self made business made running his own business while at the same time dropped out of college while at the same time in july owning multiple houses, on the other hand you gf works at game stop you don't pay for your own Internet and was rejected for military service
On November 06 2011 06:18 Pleiades wrote: Ok, I'm a businessman, and I'm at the top 1% of wealth in my area. Currently, I'm most likely in the top 5-10% in overall America. I've come from asian-immigrant parents living here in "poverty" to living lavishly. I just took what my father said to me and continued on that path. He said to me, "To have a huge amount of money, you must take huge amounts of risks." At first I didn't get what he meant until I was grown up, due to the typical asian-parenting. Do good in school, go to a good college, get a good job. That's basically the safe way of living life. What I realized was, becoming rich requires taking opportunities and the risks involved. "Every choice and every opportunity you make in life is an investment in one form or another."
I see America as the land of opportunity, not as the land of guarantee. The top is called the top for a reason. The wealth distribution is competitive by nature, because we are all competing with each other to better our lives. Some people just want to be at the top more than others, and will do basically anything to get there. Know that to become more rich, someone else has to become more poor, whether from the top, middle, or bottom in terms of distribution and proportion. Since it is so competitive, do some people have what it takes to compete?
Most rich people know what the playing field is. Rich compete with the rich, trying to be better themselves from one another. They do not like newcomers, because that is just more competition they have already have to compete with. If you are trying to get to the top in the same field as people who are already established in it, then you must take opportunities from them to rise above them. That is why usually the rich band together to try to keep other competitors away and only compete with each other. Rich people usually seek any opportunity to gain an advantage no matter the risks involved. That is just how the mind-set is to the rich. No matter what the laws or regulations are, people who want it enough to be at the top will take opportunities and risks to be at the top.
That being said, most people don't want to take the risks associated with the opportunities to become rich. Note that as you become more wealthier, your financial risks become less and less. That's why the rich become more rich, and the poor become more poor. I'd bet most people just want to live a more safer lifestyle, however if you're mature enough to realize this, safety is never guaranteed in life. Because of the competitive nature of wealth distribution of a "free market," other people will take the opportunities you decided not to take to have a chance to move to the top. There are many missed opportunities people have in life, and someone else is going to take them, because they're willing to risk it. It's a dog eat dog world out there.
You don't have to buy and use goods and services from the rich. It's not like they're forcing you with a gun to your head. If you don't like it or the price, don't buy it. However, most people usually find it an annoyance and settle with buying it anyways. If you hate or dislike the rich so much, why not invest yourself to compete with them? Yes it's a risky venture trying to form a business against them, but you're giving no competition if you don't try at all.
I don't really get why Obama wants to tax the rich, as that does not solve the problem. The rich control the market, what do you think they're going to do if he taxed them... They're going to raise prices to compensate. The only way to really combat the rich is take that step and compete in their market.
And that is the problem. Everything you said I absolutely agree with, but that's not how everyone wants to live. This country, and honestly, the world, has become so caught up in chasing the almighty dollar that people have forgotten how to live anymore.
Your argument is, if you don't want to be dirty poverty poor, then spend your life trying to be rich. '--why not invest yourself to compete with them?' But like you said, " Know that to become more rich, someone else has to become more poor, whether from the top, middle, or bottom in terms of distribution and proportion. Since it is so competitive, do some people have what it takes to compete?" So your telling us that if we don't like the way the obscenely rich control everything and take way more than they need leaving others to suffer in their wake, we should just screw others like us over in the pursuit of... wealth?
We associate money and power with happiness, and humans have for a long time, but that doesn't mean it's right, and deep down we all know that.
Nobody is saying that rags-to-riches stories don't happen anymore. They absolutely do, and you're an example of that. Good job I guess. But I think the problem more is that we don't WANT to be soul sucking corporate vampires who take everything at the expense of others, and you shouldn't want that either.
No, it wasn't 6 months. I was trying to do too much. I was going to school while investing in my own insurance company. The funds to maintain both school and my company for three years ran dry, so I had to quit school. I did not have enough time to manage both at once, so I decided to invest my time to maintaining my company than let it die than go back to school. With extra funding and partnership with Aegon, my insurance company is doing fine, but it didn't grow as fast as I wanted to.
Ok, I'm a businessman, and I'm at the top 1% of wealth in my area. Currently, I'm most likely in the top 5-10% in overall America. I've come from asian-immigrant parents living here in "poverty" to living lavishly. I just took what my father said to me and continued on that path. He said to me, "To have a huge amount of money, you must take huge amounts of risks." At first I didn't get what he meant until I was grown up, due to the typical asian-parenting. Do good in school, go to a good college, get a good job. That's basically the safe way of living life. What I realized was, becoming rich requires taking opportunities and the risks involved. "Every choice and every opportunity you make in life is an investment in one form or another."
I see America as the land of opportunity, not as the land of guarantee. The top is called the top for a reason. The wealth distribution is competitive by nature, because we are all competing with each other to better our lives. Some people just want to be at the top more than others, and will do basically anything to get there. Know that to become more rich, someone else has to become more poor, whether from the top, middle, or bottom in terms of distribution and proportion. Since it is so competitive, do some people have what it takes to compete?
Most rich people know what the playing field is. Rich compete with the rich, trying to be better themselves from one another. They do not like newcomers, because that is just more competition they have already have to compete with. If you are trying to get to the top in the same field as people who are already established in it, then you must take opportunities from them to rise above them. That is why usually the rich band together to try to keep other competitors away and only compete with each other. Rich people usually seek any opportunity to gain an advantage no matter the risks involved. That is just how the mind-set is to the rich. No matter what the laws or regulations are, people who want it enough to be at the top will take opportunities and risks to be at the top.
That being said, most people don't want to take the risks associated with the opportunities to become rich. Note that as you become more wealthier, your financial risks become less and less. That's why the rich become more rich, and the poor become more poor. I'd bet most people just want to live a more safer lifestyle, however if you're mature enough to realize this, safety is never guaranteed in life. Because of the competitive nature of wealth distribution of a "free market," other people will take the opportunities you decided not to take to have a chance to move to the top. There are many missed opportunities people have in life, and someone else is going to take them, because they're willing to risk it. It's a dog eat dog world out there.
You don't have to buy and use goods and services from the rich. It's not like they're forcing you with a gun to your head. If you don't like it or the price, don't buy it. However, most people usually find it an annoyance and settle with buying it anyways. If you hate or dislike the rich so much, why not invest yourself to compete with them? Yes it's a risky venture trying to form a business against them, but you're giving no competition if you don't try at all.
I don't really get why Obama wants to tax the rich, as that does not solve the problem. The rich control the market, what do you think they're going to do if he taxed them... They're going to raise prices to compensate. The only way to really combat the rich is take that step and compete in their market.
This is how it always was, but something weird is happening the last few decades. The economy is supposedly growing, but 99 % of the population do not get richer. When there is supposedly a recession, the top 1 % still get more wealthy. This was not always the case. Making the safe choices in your life was what conservatives (where I am from) were always striving for, and it always resulted in exactly the life you planned and wished for. But the middle class is shrinking and the safe course through life starts to feel risky. The system feels rigged from that viewpoint, and if the system is indeed rigged, why not fiddle with the rules to ensure that the safe choices always lead to the desired life? (note: safe choices = diligently studying, working, etc.)
On November 06 2011 06:40 Nullshock wrote: And that is the problem. Everything you said I absolutely agree with, but that's not how everyone wants to live. This country, and honestly, the world, has become so caught up in chasing the almighty dollar that people have forgotten how to live anymore.
Your argument is, if you don't want to be dirty poverty poor, then spend your life trying to be rich. '--why not invest yourself to compete with them?' But like you said, " Know that to become more rich, someone else has to become more poor, whether from the top, middle, or bottom in terms of distribution and proportion. Since it is so competitive, do some people have what it takes to compete?" So your telling us that if we don't like the way the obscenely rich control everything and take way more than they need leaving others to suffer in their wake, we should just screw others like us over in the pursuit of... wealth?
We associate money and power with happiness, and humans have for a long time, but that doesn't mean it's right, and deep down we all know that.
Nobody is saying that rags-to-riches stories don't happen anymore. They absolutely do, and you're an example of that. Good job I guess. But I think the problem more is that we don't WANT to be soul sucking corporate vampires who take everything at the expense of others, and you shouldn't want that either.
The problem is most people let the rich take advantage of them. They just can't say no at the end, because through all the fighting, they eventually settle on what the rich has to offer them. The rich is nothing without the people below them, however the people do not want to serve themselves. It's more convenient for someone to set up a system to serve you than serve youself, and most people settle for it.
I'm no politician, I'm not going to say what you want to hear. I'm going to say what you need to hear. I'm just going to tell you guys the playing field, not about advice on how I actually moved up. I'm still competing with you all, but the thing is, it is your decision if you want to compete at all.
On November 06 2011 06:18 Pleiades wrote: Ok, I'm a businessman, and I'm at the top 1% of wealth in my area. Currently, I'm most likely in the top 5-10% in overall America. I've come from asian-immigrant parents living here in "poverty" to living lavishly. I just took what my father said to me and continued on that path. He said to me, "To have a huge amount of money, you must take huge amounts of risks." At first I didn't get what he meant until I was grown up, due to the typical asian-parenting. Do good in school, go to a good college, get a good job. That's basically the safe way of living life. What I realized was, becoming rich requires taking opportunities and the risks involved. "Every choice and every opportunity you make in life is an investment in one form or another."
I see America as the land of opportunity, not as the land of guarantee. The top is called the top for a reason. The wealth distribution is competitive by nature, because we are all competing with each other to better our lives. Some people just want to be at the top more than others, and will do basically anything to get there. Know that to become more rich, someone else has to become more poor, whether from the top, middle, or bottom in terms of distribution and proportion. Since it is so competitive, do some people have what it takes to compete?
Most rich people know what the playing field is. Rich compete with the rich, trying to be better themselves from one another. They do not like newcomers, because that is just more competition they have already have to compete with. If you are trying to get to the top in the same field as people who are already established in it, then you must take opportunities from them to rise above them. That is why usually the rich band together to try to keep other competitors away and only compete with each other. Rich people usually seek any opportunity to gain an advantage no matter the risks involved. That is just how the mind-set is to the rich. No matter what the laws or regulations are, people who want it enough to be at the top will take opportunities and risks to be at the top.
That being said, most people don't want to take the risks associated with the opportunities to become rich. Note that as you become more wealthier, your financial risks become less and less. That's why the rich become more rich, and the poor become more poor. I'd bet most people just want to live a more safer lifestyle, however if you're mature enough to realize this, safety is never guaranteed in life. Because of the competitive nature of wealth distribution of a "free market," other people will take the opportunities you decided not to take to have a chance to move to the top. There are many missed opportunities people have in life, and someone else is going to take them, because they're willing to risk it. It's a dog eat dog world out there.
You don't have to buy and use goods and services from the rich. It's not like they're forcing you with a gun to your head. If you don't like it or the price, don't buy it. However, most people usually find it an annoyance and settle with buying it anyways. If you hate or dislike the rich so much, why not invest yourself to compete with them? Yes it's a risky venture trying to form a business against them, but you're giving no competition if you don't try at all.
I don't really get why Obama wants to tax the rich, as that does not solve the problem. The rich control the market, what do you think they're going to do if he taxed them... They're going to raise prices to compensate. The only way to really combat the rich is take that step and compete in their market.
This is all true, but you're really ignoring what the movement is about. When money is a form of free speech, and corporations are granted personhood, there is going to be a problem in your government. The government no longer works for the people, it works for the people who pay them. These people pay them to continue to enforce catastrophic economic policies that only help the rich become richer.
Effective tax rates for the wealthy are the lowest they have been since the 40's. This is unacceptable during an economic downturn. Especially when corporations are recording record profits at the expense of the middle class.
You can't just look at the issues wrong with the country and point to the "free market"/things are working as intended. Furthermore we don't have a free market, if we did there would be no such thing as a bailout. The banks received their bailout because if they went down, the nation and the economy would have collapsed. That in itself is a huge problem and if you don't understand why than you really don't understand anything.
On November 06 2011 06:52 Ropid wrote: This is how it always was, but something weird is happening the last few decades. The economy is supposedly growing, but 99 % of the population do not get richer. When there is supposedly a recession, the top 1 % still get more wealthy. This was not always the case. Making the safe choices in your life was what conservatives (where I am from) were always striving for, and it always resulted in exactly the life you planned and wished for. But the middle class is shrinking and the safe course through life starts to feel risky. The system feels rigged from that viewpoint, and if the system is indeed rigged, why not fiddle with the rules to ensure that the safe choices always lead to the desired life? (note: safe choices = diligently studying, working, etc.)
It is because the big companies and the rich have grown so big that no one wants to compete with them due to the fear of the risks in competing in the same market. The big companies have more resources and manpower, but if that deters people from competing with them, then there's no competition at all. In the past few years in America, many americans are now buying store-brand items nowadays instead of the Name-brands, which is cheaper. It's quality as a product or service is probably not as great, but they decided to buy those instead. Basically, the rich people have a "monopoly" of sorts on businesses, because people are not investing their time in another business in the same market. Everyone wants the best product and service, which only the rich and big companies can offer due to resources, instead of a second-rate product.
As for my insurance company, it almost died since I had barely any clients. I spent too much time at school and not meeting new potential clients and customers. I took many loans to set up the infrastructure of my company and to pay for my employees. Thankfully, I had connections to another insurance company, which ironically made me start mines years ago, and they had the resources and clients I needed to keep it alive in exchange for some of my shares. If you want to make yourself a success, go out there and do it yourself.
Pleiades, a problem with your argument is that the richest 1% of Americans have really no relation to you. The best way to get rich in the United States is still to be born in a rich family, connections overwhelmingly trump risk taking in that regard. Not every one creates his own company from scratch.
Even in your case you're still supported by a company that most likely has benefited a lot from the various bail-outs. Your risk taking could also have left you no money, leaving you debt you would have trouble paying off. To even support small businesses you need to tax, since otherwise you can't give those whose risks don't pay off some fall-back system.
The idea that if you tax corporations more then they will just increase the prices of all the goods so that in the end you haven't accomplished anything is not true, I think. Don't quote me on this, but I thought there was research done that disproves this. (I guess it's kind of a weak argument by me if I don't link you it, sorry)
On November 06 2011 07:34 Grumbels wrote: Pleiades, a problem with your argument is that the richest 1% of Americans have really no relation to you. The best way to get rich in the United States is still to be born in a rich family, connections overwhelmingly trump risk taking in that regard. Not every one creates his own company from scratch.
Even in your case you're still supported by a company that most likely has benefited a lot from the various bail-outs. Your risk taking could also have left you no money, leaving you debt you would have trouble paying off. To even support small businesses you need to tax, since otherwise you can't give those whose risks don't pay off some fall-back system.
The idea that if you tax corporations more then they will just increase the prices of all the goods so that in the end you haven't accomplished anything is not true, I think. Don't quote me on this, but I thought there was research done that disproves this. (I guess it's kind of a weak argument by me if I don't link you it, sorry)
I knew what I was getting myself into. I knew I could be stuck with debt that I have may not of been able to pay, but that is how it is in this market. It's so competitive that you have to take whatever you got and use it, and it can make or break you. Like I said, land of opportunity, not land of guarantee. I've had previous business ventures before my current one, and although they did make me a profit, it was very little to move me up. I used those profits and loans for my current business venture. I guess I'm learning as I go into it.
I made a huge mistake, and I had a decision to make, let 3 years and nearly a million dollars (which my company is worth back then) go down the drain, or to lose shares to another company but have something to show for it. Right now I don't have much money in my own personal pocket, but my company is worth more now. If all goes well in the future, I'm planning on expansion and hopefully I get my personal wealth from that.
As for being born into a rich family, I've talked to some wealthy families on this. Overall, some of them are afraid that their children will not be able to maintain their legacy, so that's why they try to get them the best education and involvement into their companies. They know that it is a possibility that new rivals can overtake and own what they currently have. It is that fear of loss that they are willing to go very far to make sure they stay at the top.
Basically, the rich people have a "monopoly" of sorts on businesses, because people are not investing their time in another business in the same market. Everyone wants the best product and service, which only the rich and big companies can offer due to resources, instead of a second-rate product.
Everyone wants the "cheapest" products and service, not best quality. So I suppose in a sense, we only have ourselves to blame. Wal-Mart is a good example of this, where even many of their name brand items are replaced with products of cheaper quality despite keeping the same brand name. The rich have monopolies because of unfair legislation and massive subsidies (maybe this is what you mean by resources?). When they are the ones writting the laws, you can't really expect much else.
Insurance companies are lucrative businesses. I have a conscience, so am not able to just go out and do it I guess.
On November 06 2011 06:18 Pleiades wrote: Ok, I'm a businessman, and I'm at the top 1% of wealth in my area. Currently, I'm most likely in the top 5-10% in overall America. I've come from asian-immigrant parents living here in "poverty" to living lavishly. I just took what my father said to me and continued on that path. He said to me, "To have a huge amount of money, you must take huge amounts of risks." At first I didn't get what he meant until I was grown up, due to the typical asian-parenting. Do good in school, go to a good college, get a good job. That's basically the safe way of living life. What I realized was, becoming rich requires taking opportunities and the risks involved. "Every choice and every opportunity you make in life is an investment in one form or another."
I see America as the land of opportunity, not as the land of guarantee. The top is called the top for a reason. The wealth distribution is competitive by nature, because we are all competing with each other to better our lives. Some people just want to be at the top more than others, and will do basically anything to get there. Know that to become more rich, someone else has to become more poor, whether from the top, middle, or bottom in terms of distribution and proportion. Since it is so competitive, do some people have what it takes to compete?
Most rich people know what the playing field is. Rich compete with the rich, trying to be better themselves from one another. They do not like newcomers, because that is just more competition they have already have to compete with. If you are trying to get to the top in the same field as people who are already established in it, then you must take opportunities from them to rise above them. That is why usually the rich band together to try to keep other competitors away and only compete with each other. Rich people usually seek any opportunity to gain an advantage no matter the risks involved. That is just how the mind-set is to the rich. No matter what the laws or regulations are, people who want it enough to be at the top will take opportunities and risks to be at the top.
That being said, most people don't want to take the risks associated with the opportunities to become rich. Note that as you become more wealthier, your financial risks become less and less. That's why the rich become more rich, and the poor become more poor. I'd bet most people just want to live a more safer lifestyle, however if you're mature enough to realize this, safety is never guaranteed in life. Because of the competitive nature of wealth distribution of a "free market," other people will take the opportunities you decided not to take to have a chance to move to the top. There are many missed opportunities people have in life, and someone else is going to take them, because they're willing to risk it. It's a dog eat dog world out there.
You don't have to buy and use goods and services from the rich. It's not like they're forcing you with a gun to your head. If you don't like it or the price, don't buy it. However, most people usually find it an annoyance and settle with buying it anyways. If you hate or dislike the rich so much, why not invest yourself to compete with them? Yes it's a risky venture trying to form a business against them, but you're giving no competition if you don't try at all.
I don't really get why Obama wants to tax the rich, as that does not solve the problem. The rich control the market, what do you think they're going to do if he taxed them... They're going to raise prices to compensate. The only way to really combat the rich is take that step and compete in their market.
It was the best of times, it was the worst of times.
Basically, the rich people have a "monopoly" of sorts on businesses, because people are not investing their time in another business in the same market. Everyone wants the best product and service, which only the rich and big companies can offer due to resources, instead of a second-rate product.
Everyone wants the "cheapest" products and service, not best quality. So I suppose in a sense, we only have ourselves to blame. Wal-Mart is a good example of this, where even many of their name brand items are replaced with products of cheaper quality despite keeping the same brand name. The rich have monopolies because of unfair legislation and massive subsidies (maybe this is what you mean by resources?). When they are the ones writting the laws, you can't really expect much else.
Insurance companies are lucrative businesses. I have a conscience, so am not able to just go out and do it I guess.
That is because they're still buying at Wal'Mart and it's a STORE-brand. I only used it as an example that you don't always have to buy the best quality. It's much convenient to buy many things in a large marketplace than different small businesses, but that's still the decision of the consumer to buy wherever they want to.
What I'm saying is if you dislike the hold of huge companies have on the market, don't buy from them and buy from the small businesses no matter what the inconvenience. If you settle for the huge companies, you're not helping the small ones.
Don't get me wrong about the government, I know what you guys are saying. It's true, politicians are just another opportunity rich people take to gain an advantage. However, why fight politicians when you can fight the rich on their own market and terms? I find politicians make empty promises all the time, because they say what you want to hear only. When they fully know that doing and saying are very different things.
It's not like the rich are all poweful. They depend on people to capitalize on their interests. One of the huge problem is, the lower classes can't really band together to compete with the higher classes, because they're also competing with each other. They don't really have each other's back, because they barely have anything, and would rather settle for what the rich has to offer just for convenience.
Basically, the rich people have a "monopoly" of sorts on businesses, because people are not investing their time in another business in the same market. Everyone wants the best product and service, which only the rich and big companies can offer due to resources, instead of a second-rate product.
Everyone wants the "cheapest" products and service, not best quality. So I suppose in a sense, we only have ourselves to blame. Wal-Mart is a good example of this, where even many of their name brand items are replaced with products of cheaper quality despite keeping the same brand name. The rich have monopolies because of unfair legislation and massive subsidies (maybe this is what you mean by resources?). When they are the ones writting the laws, you can't really expect much else.
Insurance companies are lucrative businesses. I have a conscience, so am not able to just go out and do it I guess.
That is because they're still buying at Wal'Mart and it's a STORE-brand. I only used it as an example that you don't always have to buy the best quality. It's much convenient to buy many things in a large marketplace than different small businesses, but that's still the decision of the consumer to buy wherever they want to.
What I'm saying is if you dislike the hold of huge companies have on the market, don't buy from them and buy from the small businesses no matter what the inconvenience. If you settle for the huge companies, you're not helping the small ones.
Don't get me wrong about the government, I know what you guys are saying. It's true, politicians are just another opportunity rich people take to gain an advantage. However, why fight politicians when you can fight the rich on their own market and terms? I find politicians make empty promises all the time, because they say what you want to hear only. When they fully know that doing and saying are very different things.
It's not like the rich are all poweful. They depend on people to capitalize on their interests. One of the huge problem is, the lower classes can't really band together to compete with the higher classes, because they're also competing with each other. They don't really have each other's back, because they barely have anything, and would rather settle for what the rich has to offer just for convenience.
I think you are sidestepping the bigger issue a little. Credit to you for taking the competition. I think many admire the character-strenght it takes and many will be interested in supporting such companies if they find out they exist! But I don't think you are the main culprit in this. What I have heard, the tax should only hit for yearly income above 500,000 or 1,000,000 dollars and in that case it is unlikely you will be hit unless you are really milking it. A higher tax on the rich will give more money for the state and more money for the state can be used for growth or welfare that makes it easier to move socially. As can any raise in taxes. However the problem with corporations and politicians making deals is too much of an issue to get it working properly and that is the occupy spirit. The lower class need a hand to level the playing-field. You got a partner-company and got "lucky" in that way, but generally it is harder to get there on your own. Having too little political influence is a problem for the lower classes. They are essentially getting beat up from both republicans and democrats. They feel betrayed by Obama because in their opinions he has not done enough for securing the livelyhood of the weak. That is the what the left-leaning democrats are protesting. They were hoping he was their president, but turns out he is not. Making a new party to represent you is senseless because the start-up is so extremely steep: You need to win a seat to get any say in politics and number 2 is the first looser. An election will take millions of dollars to spread the news enough. Besides, the primary culprits are the relations between the corporations and politicians getting problematic laws passed, Wall Street short-term trade and private equity being too lucrative, where it is a percentage-game and therefore only for the rich to play and lastly the big banks (after the bail-outs with high wage bonus at the top and no increase in the amount lend), Insurrance is a numbers game and a wording game (cover as little as possible with as small a price as possible without having to pay out too often). It is not investment banking. However you should know very well what risk-management is about and why too much on the risky side is bad.
Well I wouldn't say I got lucky getting a partnership, because the person I have connections to Aegon, I have worked with in the past. A good way to help grow your business is to meet people and pool talents and resources. This is one of the reasons why I had trouble maintaining my business. I chose to stay in college which limited the amount of time I could meet clients, people, and my own employees. Another factor is that I am still very young. People tend to have more comfort in dealing with older business associates seeing them as more experienced, which in my case was true.
I agree that there are many problems with today's economic issues in regarding wealth distribution, but I'm going to state this metaphor, "while you can change the playing field, you cannot change the people who are playing." Most likely any economic reform in a free market that we do, the people who are rich or willing to be rich will always take the opportunities and risks associated to be on the top again. We can alleviate the problem, but I fear we cannot solve it without changing our own choices and decisions.
Making it easier to see your opponents true face will certainly go a long way in making it possible to enter a market. I am of the opinion that as soon as the field is easier to read, it will automatically generate a lot more competition. People need to see where they can make a business before they take the risks. I think the players will be ready when the field is plain and the name of the game is a competitive market.
EPT
