I absolutely believe that
This article references the research/study:
Living in a bigger house wonât make you happier â but this will (today.com)
Itâs one of the reasons that liberals bother me. I always suspect that one of the reasons they want the government to raise taxes on the wealthy is pure envy.
1 Like
Envy is tolerable if it motivates the person to better themselves. Liberals are disgusting pieces of shit because instead of improving themselves they want to tear down anyone doing better than them and have everyone living in squalor.
3 Likes
Agreed. When liberals want to tax the rich itâs something along the lines of one part envy, one part greed, and one part being fine with violating other people, and then presenting the taxation as benevolent and morally superior. They are turds.
1 Like
The historical debate around equity, capital, and labor underscores a system that currently favors the hyperwealthy, often regardless of the ethical or moral merits of how their wealth was amassed. Every enterprise, no matter how automated or digitized, fundamentally relies on human labor, whether direct or indirect. However, we are on the cusp of a transformative era.
In the near future, advancements in AI and robotic automation are poised to redefine the very nature of work. Many traditional jobs, particularly those that are labor-intensive or menial, are likely to be automated. This shift will challenge our conventional views on employment, income, and productivity.
As we transition towards what could be described as a âpost-scarcityâ economyâa concept where the abundance of goods and services renders traditional economic constraints obsoleteâwe must rethink our socio-economic frameworks. In such a world, the usual methods of wealth generation will be radically altered. We need to prepare for profound changes, including the potential for new economic models that do not rely solely on currency.
This isnât just speculation; itâs a foreseeable shift within our lifetimes. As we discuss and debate these issues, letâs focus on understanding these changes and preparing for them, rather than clinging to outdated ideologies. The challenge isnât just about adjusting tax policies but reimagining our economic structures to ensure fairness and sustainability in an age where traditional roles of capital and labor are transformed.
The WEF is not causing the great reset, its happening anyway, and they had enough foresight ot model outcomes and make suggestions what are you doing to prepare for this?
Simply put âmuh liberals wanns tax the richâ is caveman talk, you are all going to be devoid of capital in decades failure to prepare is preparing to fail.
I donât agree with that. I think thatâs something that envious people want to believe.
But im fucking loaded and so is Gary.
What are you saying then? You seem to be advocating for socialism or some type of capital control, but I could be wrong. You havenât really said much, just linked a bunch of videos like youâre the dude in them. What are you advocating for and why should I care? Answer in your own words.
I AM the guy in the end of western society video.
What I am saying is that you need to prepare for whats next, what you mistakenly think is socialism in the US, and will not affect you other than give you a bigger TAX bill today, because you are ok today, will not be âsocialism,â when you are not ok, in a decade or so. IT will be a necessity.
IF you listen to his story he clearly differentiates himself as being from being a working class, poor area, where literally noone makes it in banking, which is normally fullof public school, top tier university attendees, a guy who made it in the world of banking, and walked away for its lack of morality, and the over all abuse of regulations by the wealthy to their benefit. HE saw the game and he decided it was inequitable and somethign must be done about it.
Damn regards!!!
This is the first intelligent thing you have said.
Explain this to me like Iâm 4. Unless your a lefty, then pretend Iâm of legal age. I donât know how or where you see this anywhere in society. Itâs mostly just a silly talking point. The system is give more get more in return. If you only look at the second half of âGet more in returnâ then yes itâs a system that favors the rich. The only problem is that first part. The ultra wealthy put more into the system than the rest of us. The top 1% pays something like 20% of all of the taxes.
lol from you that is really rich
Thank you.
Yes, but there r hundreds of rags to riches stories, many even more dire.
Li Lu is a clear example, born in rural China, no schooling but managed to scrape his way thru extreme poverty to become a trusted advisor to Charlie munger and run one of the worldâs most recognised investment firms
Gary has a good message and I regularly watch his vids
Out of 7 billion there are not HUNDREDS of stories of people âmaking it,â although i would argue having lots of money is not evidence of anyone making it.
1 Like
Really? So thoughout the last century, u donât think there r hundreds of people across the world that have picked themselves out from poverty and made something of themselves? I can count at least a doz people from my immediate social circle alone that came from 3rd world countries with just their luggage, no command of the English language, yet managed to build a life and business in a new country. Thatâs literally the immigrant story.
Regarding using money as a metric, I agree, it isnât the be all and end all determinant, but it certainly is a common factor when looking at whether a person has âachievedâ something.
I think u donât have a grasp of scale when u say there isnât hundreds. There r literally thousands. People write books about these people.
Sure that is not making it to the top elite of people who decide what happens, though. The wealth you are talking about is chicken feed unless you know hundreds of billionaires. MIllionaires are so passe.
1 Like