More to the point THM - he just created $5 Million in JOBS building toy trains.

If you want to talk about structural problems with healthcare, lets talk about what's wrong with tying health insurance with having a job. Also, most antibiotics are free at pharmacies, at least in New York.

That's a stupid thing to say Krellin. Gates has donated more money to charities than most people could even dream of making.

You know...once mafia starts again, I'll go away. Where is PE? Let's get this shit going...lol

Well, the trains are probably made in China but yes, there's a correlation somewhere.

Abge - TAXES!! iF HE WANTS TO PAY MORE HE CAN. He's a fucking hypocrite, and the morons on the left buy that shit. If he thinks he SHOULD pay more, he WOULD. That is totally different from taxes.

totally differetn from charity, I should say.

Clearly he doesn't think higher taxes do good, or he would pay more.

I don't think that's true at all. He isn't advocating that people should give money to the government freely. He's saying taxes should be higher. I think the town should fix the pothole on my street, but am I a hypocrite if I don't go out and fix it myself?

Only in Krellville.

@THM well that's what I'm here to question. How can we endorse him spending that in model trains while this world is medievally cruel to the poor? Every dollar that he doesn't spend helping the poor is snatching food from their mouths, isn't it?

Smokin' dope and playing with model trains is a good fuckin' time.

We are living in a society that now preaches the problems of social and economic inequality, and yet they are letting the FED continue to allow this though their own policies. Middle class-blah- there is no more middle class. Our world is made up of the haves and have nots.

@Abge---are we truly better off than we were 100 years ago. Does technology really make things better. Maybe easier, but I am not sure better.

@everyone. Most of these ultra rich you like to chastise, they also are some of the most philanthropic people out there. Both buffet and gates have pledged the vast majority of the their fortunes to charity upon their deaths.

Krells got his ass kicked soundly over and over in this thread. Better troll a different topic, krellin.

"Most of these ultra rich you like to chastise, they also are some of the most philanthropic people out there. Both buffet and gates have pledged the vast majority of the their fortunes to charity upon their deaths."

I'd be philanthropic too if I had a fortune in the billions. You're confusing correlation with causation.

@ssorren

Look at life expectancy, infant mortality rates, disease. I'd say we're better off.

so your saying because of medicine and life expectancy we are better off

we have a world full of 7+ billion people, and plan to be around 10+ billion in 30 years. From everything I've read,thats the max that this planet can possibly sustain. resources are not there for anymore, i would love to have this same conversation in 30 years with you

In those areas we are objectively better. I would argue we are better in more intangible ways as well.

Um...better now does not mean things will never be bad in the future...

just to be clear, i have not said we are not better , I'm merely trying to understand your point. It is a very broad topic, and i would agree that some things are better and some aren't

If someone's super-rich, and they innovated and WORKED and deserve it...

Then good for them. All the way.

It's the people that DON'T work for it and 1. Inherit wealth and status from daddy/mommy or 2. Get rich off of something exploitative or shallow that doesn't add something to the world...THOSE are the people that piss us (or at least me) off.

Bill Gates?
Thumbs up.
Blue Bloods (and royals, sorry UK WebDippers) that just got their wealth by being born into the right family?
That's more irksome.
Folks who make their money on the suffering of others?
That pisses us the hell off.

Merit is the be-all end-all here, krellin--

If you work and deserve the wealth, you SHOULD enjoy your wealth.

If you don't, you shouldn't.

My point was that even though being poor now sucks less than it did 100 years ago, I don't think conditions for the poor are where they should be in our modern society.

@2WL you don't have to be worth billions, to be philanthropic, charity and the desire to help comes from within an individual. Also charity does not have to be monetary, you can donate your time as well

For what I get paid I might as well be donating my time.

that would be a noble gesture, but if not--i'll smoke dope and watch toy trains go around with you

Mostly with abge on this one.

Nothing to add, really.

Why does everyone here hate Pete Waterman so much?

So -- inequality of "wealth" -- for those of you pointing our the "injustice" or whatever terms you wish to apply -- what is the appropriate spectrum of wealth? Should the Bill Gates and the Wall Street money makers have a cap on their wealth? Do you beleive "Draconian" measures should be taken to limit their wealth (and likewise raise the wealth level of the poor) ....and do you really think that would make a spits worth of difference in how happy the poorest are? Because....follow me here (abge will grasp this clearly, I know) - the poorest x% will *always* be the poorest x%...

/\ likewise, the top 1% will always be the top 1%....the only difference will be if we "level" the playing field, the top 1% might not be paying 36% of the tax burden any more, as they currently are for the entire nation (or whatever the exact and huge number is)...