Home > Uncategorized > Sickening inequality facts

Sickening inequality facts

from Lars Syll


  1. patrick newman
    February 9, 2019 at 11:48 pm

    Anyone for trickle-down economics? Lick the arses of these 26 billionaires and wait for something to trickle-down!

  2. February 10, 2019 at 12:13 am

    Can you imagine how frightened they are? Childhood monopoly transformed into cannibal capitalism. What a nightmare. Who will fall out when the number drops to 23, and then 22. Insatiable want unleashed in a free market neomalthusian snarlathon.

    I used to sing a song the had this refrain; “And we all gotta duck, when the shit hits the fan.” I believe it was called ten kids in a cadillac.

    Economaths using game theory can probably figure out when nobody will own everything.

  3. Helen Sakho
    February 10, 2019 at 1:44 am

    The trickle-up process started a long time ago. Even if the 26 richest people decease in number, they will ensure that the proxy dealings and wheelings they conduct confine a greater proportion of the poorest to increasing poverty. The final aim is to make them, once again, appreciate the downward effect of potential charity and curtail others from protesting about real issues.

  4. culturalanalysis.net
    February 10, 2019 at 4:41 am

    This is Extreme level of inequality, but not sure why it is labelled “sickening”. Seems moralistic.

    • Steve McGiffen
      February 10, 2019 at 3:01 pm

      If you don’t know, then no-one will be able to explain it to you.

      • culturalanalysis.net
        February 10, 2019 at 10:28 pm

        On that basis you could not possibly verify whether the claim has the same meaning as the one intended by the author, let alone defend the claim against objections. The claim is meaningless.

      • February 11, 2019 at 10:03 am

        Not being able to verify the meaning of a claim does not mean it is meaningless, it means it is ambiguous. Like the gestalt figure in which some people see an old lady, others a young one. The verification issue only arises wheen one seeks to defend one interpretation by denying (or sneering at) another, as Culturalanalyst does here with the issue being a moral one.

  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.