Kevin O'Leary is kind of a dick

[GirlySports]

I sort of agree. Maybe 85 people have too much and it should be 850 but businesses make the world go round.

I've actually made the argument that we should stop giving aid to Africa because they just sit around and rely on it. Governments there are corrupt, do nothing and just spend the aid.

Would you cap wealth? Make them pay more taxes? I think rich people already give to charity but somewhere down the line it just gets eaten up or stolen and it goes nowhere.

[Red John]

Originally Posted by flamesfever

I've spent a fair amount of time watching the Dragons, and O'Leary strikes me as the one that is looking for a sure thing, and willing to take the least risk.

Don't think that he's adverse to risk, he just looks for deals that benefit him in a huge way.

He's the dragon that usually offers loans to people and asks for royalties instead of just investing in their business. He wants to bend people over and take advantage of people with good ideas instead of partnering with them.

It's worked pretty well for him. He's ruthless.

[Brannigans Law]

Originally Posted by GreenLantern2814

Sigh... 'doomed'? What, is the earth going to spin off its axis? Is the sun about to explode?

Tell your great grandchildren to bust their ass, read lots of books, realize that nobody is going to hand them anything and that life is what they make of it.

Or you could tell them they're victims because Kevin O'Leary is a dick.

Both recipes probably get you the same cake, right?

Oh the wonderful fallacy of "just work hard enough and you can be 1 of the 85 in 7 billion.

Originally Posted by GirlySports

I sort of agree. Maybe 85 people have too much and it should be 850 but businesses make the world go round.

I've actually made the argument that we should stop giving aid to Africa because they just sit around and rely on it. Governments there are corrupt, do nothing and just spend the aid.

Would you cap wealth? Make them pay more taxes? I think rich people already give to charity but somewhere down the line it just gets eaten up or stolen and it goes nowhere.

Ya, screw Africa .

Nothing personal to either of you, this is just a bit of a frustration post but god.. I really hate ultra conservatives and their mindset. I truly do.

[Mr.Coffee]

What's wrong with social inequality? Mr. O'Greedy asks in the video but some research suggests this:

-Higher rates of social problems (obesity, mental illness, homicides, teenage births, incarceration, child conflict, drug use)
-My personal favourite, lower rates of social goods (life expectancy, educational performance, women's status, SOCIAL MOBILITY...

"Pickett and Wilkinson argue that inequality and social stratification lead to higher levels of psychosocial stress and status anxiety which can lead to depression, chemical dependency, less community life, parenting problems and stress-related diseases.[89]"

All the above from a 2 second search and finding Wikipedia so feel free to tear that apart if need be.

I think the reality is that usually in history if the wealth inequality continues to grow then you end up with revolution, like France. I don't think it has as much to do with how hard a rich guy works, and in fact I remember reading that there is research that points to how the richer you get, the more you start to believe it is because of how great you are and not so much all the other countless factors that led you to the position you're in.

I think personally, just like literally everything else in life, there needs to be a balance. There has to be some social inequality to drive work ethic but there can't be too much and there needs to be a societal mechanism to re-distribute at some point.

The game is rigged the way it is now in many countries.

[Red John]

What's funny is that taking away from the rich never works. They're too smart and have accountants and lawyers who know how to find every tax loophole in the book.

It ends up being the middle class that gets penalized and eventually disappears.

The rich always get richer and any measures taken to "even things out" just ends up hurting the middle class and giving it to the poor, who manage it poorly and hand it right back to the rich.

Back to square one.

[Mr.Coffee]

Originally Posted by Red John

What's funny is that taking away from the rich never works. They're too smart and have accountants and lawyers who know how to find every tax loophole in the book.

It ends up being the middle class that gets penalized and eventually disappears.

The rich always get richer and any measures taken to "even things out" just ends up hurting the middle class and giving it to the poor, who manage it poorly and hand it right back to the rich.

Back to square one.

I'd agree but do you understand what eventually can happen?

[Brannigans Law]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

What's wrong with social inequality? Mr. O'Greedy asks in the video but some research suggests this:

-Higher rates of social problems (obesity, mental illness, homicides, teenage births, incarceration, child conflict, drug use)
-My personal favourite, lower rates of social goods (life expectancy, educational performance, women's status, SOCIAL MOBILITY...

"Pickett and Wilkinson argue that inequality and social stratification lead to higher levels of psychosocial stress and status anxiety which can lead to depression, chemical dependency, less community life, parenting problems and stress-related diseases.[89]"

All the above from a 2 second search and finding Wikipedia so feel free to tear that apart if need be.

I think the reality is that usually in history if the wealth inequality continues to grow then you end up with revolution, like France. I don't think it has as much to do with how hard a rich guy works, and in fact I remember reading that there is research that points to how the richer you get, the more you start to believe it is because of how great you are and not so much all the other countless factors that led you to the position you're in.

I think personally, just like literally everything else in life, there needs to be a balance. There has to be some social inequality to drive work ethic but there can't be too much and there needs to be a societal mechanism to re-distribute at some point.

The game is rigged the way it is now in many countries.

A big problem is being born in the right circumstance. Are you born in Africa or China or India? If you are, odds are that you're born into abject poverty. If Mr Wonderful had been born to a poor family in Uganda or Congo he's more likely to have become a child soldier than a millionaire d bag. But hey if you win the birth lottery and are born in north america, spin the wheel again!

Are you born to a rich white family? No? Well, good luck. If Mr Wonderful had been born to a poor family in Chicago surrounded by poverty and gang violence, odds are he'd be just another statistic and been shot or wound up in jail due to drug/gang violence.

Social mobility and inequality aren't the problem of the rich until it becomes so out of proportion the 99% put down their tools and pick up torches and weapons.

[GirlySports]

what is the balance? I think Canada is a good balance.

Is it communism? China has a much wider wealth discrepancy than we do.

Businessman, Dictators, Great Leaders, Emperors, they're all rich under any system.

[GreenLantern2814]

Originally Posted by Brannigans Law

Oh the wonderful fallacy of "just work hard enough and you can be 1 of the 85 in 7 billion.

I'm not ultra conservative. I've never voted blue in my life. And I don't think that if you just work hard enough you can be a 1% individual.

However, I do think that nobody is holding anyone else back. I also realize there's a middle ground. Not a middle class, but there's many many many people out there who manage to escape the middle class without becoming one of the 85.

And if 85 people control the same amount of money than 3.5 billion, I would guess they aren't just sleeping under it like Smaug the dragon. There's literally trillions of dollars floating around out there. So either go get some or don't. Blaming other people doesn't solve anything, but anger is probably better directed at the liberal arts degree hanging on the wall *at least on mine* than Kevin O'Leary.

[Iowa_Flames_Fan]

Originally Posted by Tinordi

Anyone who would argue that having 85 people owning as many resources as 3.5 billion because it gives them something to aspire to is either a comedian or a psychopath. What a damning indictment of our collective conscience when remarks like that just seem to make us shrug.

How is it damning? I think you might be overestimating the wider cultural importance of remarks made by TV personalities. Can't we be concerned about wealth disparity as an issue while simultaneously not caring what Kevin O'Leary thinks about it?

[Parallex]

Originally Posted by OurBigFatWallet

If it's an act - he is a good actor.

It's not an act. My dad has met him on several occasions... says the TV personality is his off-screen personality.

[GreenLantern2814]

Originally Posted by Brannigans Law

A big problem is being born in the right circumstance. Are you born in Africa or China or India? If you are, odds are that you're born into abject poverty. If Mr Wonderful had been born to a poor family in Uganda or Congo he's more likely to have become a child soldier than a millionaire d bag. But hey if you win the birth lottery and are born in north america, spin the wheel again!

Are you born to a rich white family? No? Well, good luck. If Mr Wonderful had been born to a poor family in Chicago surrounded by poverty and gang violence, odds are he'd be just another statistic and been shot or wound up in jail due to drug/gang violence.

Social mobility and inequality aren't the problem of the rich until it becomes so out of proportion the 99% put down their tools and pick up torches and weapons.

Seriously dude? Kevin O'Leary's parents divorced when he was very young, his dad was a salesman who died early in his life, and his mother was a seamstress.

Some poor family in Chicago's problems are not caused by the 1%. They're caused by unstable family situations and a lack of emphasis on education. Social mobility is the problem of the person who wants to be upwardly mobile. And if a person commits to that, it's going to be very hard for them to be denied.

But if you want to be a person that comes home from a 15/hour job, smokes a bowl, eats some Raman noodles and watches Archer, then yeah. It's going to be tough to move up. The great fallacy here is that somehow it's your right to move up the social and economic ladder. It's not. You have the ability to, but if you're not going to put the time in to learning the skills required for it, you're going to languish at the bottom and bitch about the guy from Dragon's Den.

[nik-]

Socio-economic mobility hasn't decreased because people are lazy.

[GreenLantern2814]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

What's wrong with social inequality? Mr. O'Greedy asks in the video but some research suggests this:

-Higher rates of social problems (obesity, mental illness, homicides, teenage births, incarceration, child conflict, drug use)
-My personal favourite, lower rates of social goods (life expectancy, educational performance, women's status, SOCIAL MOBILITY...

"Pickett and Wilkinson argue that inequality and social stratification lead to higher levels of psychosocial stress and status anxiety which can lead to depression, chemical dependency, less community life, parenting problems and stress-related diseases.[89]"

All the above from a 2 second search and finding Wikipedia so feel free to tear that apart if need be.

I think the reality is that usually in history if the wealth inequality continues to grow then you end up with revolution, like France. I don't think it has as much to do with how hard a rich guy works, and in fact I remember reading that there is research that points to how the richer you get, the more you start to believe it is because of how great you are and not so much all the other countless factors that led you to the position you're in.

I think personally, just like literally everything else in life, there needs to be a balance. There has to be some social inequality to drive work ethic but there can't be too much and there needs to be a societal mechanism to re-distribute at some point.

The game is rigged the way it is now in many countries.

If you feel this way, I can guarantee you're capping your own potential. Please, answer this question honestly: who is actively preventing you from getting what you want?

[Brannigans Law]

Originally Posted by GreenLantern2814

However, I do think that nobody is holding anyone else back. I also realize there's a middle ground. Not a middle class, but there's many many many people out there who manage to escape the middle class without becoming one of the 85.

I don't think there's any one person or group doing that either. The problem is that the middle class is shrinking. The enormous wealth generated and being hoarded by the very elite few is coming at the cost of stagnating the "wealth" of the poor and eroding the middle the class. All this new wealth is essentially staying in their hands too. It's not being funneled down. Any society that wants itself to be great has to have something for people to work for, and a strong middleclass is a vital piece of that. People should be able to have 2 jobs in a family, support kids, and put them to school. That should be a right of any citizen willing to work. If you can't make a go of it while working 40 hours because the pay is so bad or the 40 hours isn't there, something is wrong.

Originally Posted by GreenLantern2814

And if 85 people control the same amount of money than 3.5 billion, I would guess they aren't just sleeping under it like Smaug the dragon. There's literally trillions of dollars floating around out there. So either go get some or don't. Blaming other people doesn't solve anything, but anger is probably better directed at the liberal arts degree hanging on the wall *at least on mine* than Kevin O'Leary.

This kind of blurs the issue without cause. Look, approach it the other way around then. If 85 people have the wealth of 3.5 billion, that means they control the lions share of all wealth on Earth. So in a way, yes, they are hoarding it like Smaug.

[Brannigans Law]

Originally Posted by GreenLantern2814

Seriously dude? Kevin O'Leary's parents divorced when he was very young, his dad was a salesman who died early in his life, and his mother was a seamstress.

Some poor family in Chicago's problems are not caused by the 1%. They're caused by unstable family situations and a lack of emphasis on education. Social mobility is the problem of the person who wants to be upwardly mobile. And if a person commits to that, it's going to be very hard for them to be denied.

But if you want to be a person that comes home from a 15/hour job, smokes a bowl, eats some Raman noodles and watches Archer, then yeah. It's going to be tough to move up. The great fallacy here is that somehow it's your right to move up the social and economic ladder. It's not. You have the ability to, but if you're not going to put the time in to learning the skills required for it, you're going to languish at the bottom and bitch about the guy from Dragon's Den.

Ladies and gentlemen, charles krauthammer

[NuclearFart]

"Seems like there are some butt hurt 99%er's in here"
-Kevin O'leary

[Mr.Coffee]

Originally Posted by GreenLantern2814

If you feel this way, I can guarantee you're capping your own potential. Please, answer this question honestly: who is actively preventing you from getting what you want?

I can honestly say I do not want to be super rich. I think the premier life is at upper middle class and I'm on target for that I think eventually. So nobody is stopping me from getting what I want other than myself and that is the answer you're looking for.

I agree with some statements you make, but the reality is that it isn't just a case of poor people being poor because they're not working hard enough. It's too complex a problem to slap a solution like "work harder" on it and when you do that like Mr. O'Greedy you sound like a moron.

At the end of the day a guy like O'Greedy simply lacks compassion for others. That's the story essentially, and it isn't a news worthy story that some people don't have the ability to have empathy.

[GreenLantern2814]

Originally Posted by Brannigans Law

I don't think there's any one person or group doing that either. The problem is that the middle class is shrinking. The enormous wealth generated and being hoarded by the very elite few is coming at the cost of stagnating the "wealth" of the poor and eroding the middle the class. All this new wealth is essentially staying in their hands too. It's not being funneled down. Any society that wants itself to be great has to have something for people to work for, and a strong middleclass is a vital piece of that. People should be able to have 2 jobs in a family, support kids, and put them to school. That should be a right of any citizen willing to work. If you can't make a go of it while working 40 hours because the pay is so bad or the 40 hours isn't there, something is wrong.



This kind of blurs the issue without cause. Look, approach it the other way around then. If 85 people have the wealth of 3.5 billion, that means they control the lions share of all wealth on Earth. So in a way, yes, they are hoarding it like Smaug.

You should probably find a new job or develop new skills that allow you to make a go of it on 40 hours a week. And guess what, the people that have managed to escape the middle class don't work 40 hours a week.

Once again, who is actively preventing you or anyone else from achieving their full potential?

The danger to future generations lies in perpetuating the idea that there is some bare minimum effort that will allow you to be 'comfortable'. Why don't we try teaching kids to be sharks; keep moving forward, keep looking for the next meal, the next opportunity? If we could ingrain that mindset into our culture, we'd be unstoppable.

Changing gears...

Africa has a population of 1.033 billion (*google*)
India has a population of 1.273 billion (*google*)
China has a population of 1.315 billion (*google*)

There's your 3.5 billion. Who's in charge in those places?

[nik-]

Originally Posted by GreenLantern2814

You should probably find a new job or develop new skills that allow you to make a go of it on 40 hours a week. And guess what, the people that have managed to escape the middle class don't work 40 hours a week.

Once again, who is actively preventing you or anyone else from achieving their full potential?

The danger to future generations lies in perpetuating the idea that there is some bare minimum effort that will allow you to be 'comfortable'. Why don't we try teaching kids to be sharks; keep moving forward, keep looking for the next meal, the next opportunity? If we could ingrain that mindset into our culture, we'd be unstoppable.

Changing gears...

Africa has a population of 1.033 billion (*google*)
India has a population of 1.273 billion (*google*)
China has a population of 1.315 billion (*google*)

There's your 3.5 billion. Who's in charge in those places?

wow