Ray Dalio is possibly a very smart guy, but he is a globalist. He has his own agenda to fulfill the globalist agenda. Lead by example. He should donate a significant percentage of his wealth if he really thinks socialism works. And wait and see how those lazy fellows will be even lazier. Why work when everything is provided? I do believe in providing basic needs like food, etc. Enough for them to survive. If they want more, they have to work. So long that there's greed in human, Communism will not work. Although Communism sounds and looks good in theory, but it's not applicable in the current world.
Basic needs are provided in this country (and EU). Food, housing, cell phone, education and health care is pretty much free if you can't provide them for yourself.
Yes there is. But you do a lot of mental gymnastics to vilify the left. Like your racism comment in politics - the left uses it as deflection on a losing argument but not trump when he avoided s question citing racism. And now you talk about Dalio being a socialist but then immediate suggest socialist policies.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/timwor...an-most-of-the-rest-of-humanity/#407e7c7854ef https://www.forbes.com/sites/timwor...he-top-20-of-all-income-earners/#1a88ab52316f It's been a well established fact that the poor in the US are better off than average person throughout the world. The average welfare recipient receives more in benefits than 80% of income earners worldwide. How can you possibly say that capitalism isn't working for most people if even those living off of welfare have a higher income than the vast majority of the world?
Income inequity has a strong correlation to the stock market. In 1928 it had rocketed up to about the same level we are at now. The richer you are the more likely you are to have investments in the stock market, middle America was buried in debt living way past their means - as opposed to investing. I think that outsourcing, offshore tax havens, & low interest rates have compounded this in a big way over the last decade when that trend went parabolic. Income inequality began in the late 70's and has trended up since, in sync with the stock market. source: St. Louis Fed
Vilfredo Pareto observed that 20% of the population controlled 80% of the wealth. The flip side is 80% of the population controlled only 20% of the wealth. Is the 20% of the wealth good enough for the 80% of the population? If no, this thread title is correct.
The Pareto principle applies to many disciplines. He found this out in the late 1800s and applies all over the world. BTW, from Wikipedia - "The Pareto principle also applies to taxation. In the US, the top 20% of earners have paid roughly 80% of Federal income taxes in 2000 and 2006,[11] and again in 2018.[12]"