w*****a 发帖数: 560 | 1 这个“试题”系列已经写了三篇了,分别是历史题(http://www.mitbbs.com/article_t/USANews/33263323.html)、政治题(http://www.mitbbs.com/article_t/USANews/33299315.html)及其番外(http://www.mitbbs.com/article_t/USANews/33312893.html)。接下来就该问经济题了。
在经济方面,华人和船粉最关心的就是中产(其实是伪产,因为一次失业一场大病就财
产归零了)。中产是个相对概念,其根本是财富占有率。现在中产变中惨,这正是财富
占有率减少的表现。中产所失去的财富份额被谁夺走了呢?不是最底层的人,因为他们
从过去到现在就不占多少财富。所以只能是0.1%夺取了中产的财富份额。而且这种掠夺
还会固化,例如说现在遗产税更加宽松。
那么请问黄船粉(甚至包括香蕉船粉),当你们在政治题中喊打喊杀时,是否有真正的
勇气从0.1%手中为华人中产(甚至包括其它颜色的中产)夺回财富份额呢?也欢迎非船
粉加入讨论。 | s*********r 发帖数: 9493 | 2 川粉有勇气把华人中产的财富送给0.1%,
to Make America Great Again.
【在 w*****a 的大作中提到】 : 这个“试题”系列已经写了三篇了,分别是历史题(http://www.mitbbs.com/article_t/USANews/33263323.html)、政治题(http://www.mitbbs.com/article_t/USANews/33299315.html)及其番外(http://www.mitbbs.com/article_t/USANews/33312893.html)。接下来就该问经济题了。 : 在经济方面,华人和船粉最关心的就是中产(其实是伪产,因为一次失业一场大病就财 : 产归零了)。中产是个相对概念,其根本是财富占有率。现在中产变中惨,这正是财富 : 占有率减少的表现。中产所失去的财富份额被谁夺走了呢?不是最底层的人,因为他们 : 从过去到现在就不占多少财富。所以只能是0.1%夺取了中产的财富份额。而且这种掠夺 : 还会固化,例如说现在遗产税更加宽松。 : 那么请问黄船粉(甚至包括香蕉船粉),当你们在政治题中喊打喊杀时,是否有真正的 : 勇气从0.1%手中为华人中产(甚至包括其它颜色的中产)夺回财富份额呢?也欢迎非船 : 粉加入讨论。
| z**********i 发帖数: 9546 | | l********l 发帖数: 4 | 4 what kind of stupid question is this?
Economy is not 0-sum game. In a free society, wealth is created, not robbed
by one person from another.
When Tim Cook sells you an iPhone X, did he rob you or you voluntarily pay
him $1000 for it? You must think iPhone X worths at least $1000 to you,
otherwise why would you buy it? The trade makes both you and Tim Cook better
off.
So, the problem is not that the 0.1% has a lot of wealth. If people get rich
through volunteer trades with other people, that means they are producing
goods and services that other people want. The more billionaires the better.
Don't you think the world will be a better place if there are more Bill
Gates, Steve Jobs, Zukerberg?
Is America a completely free society? Of cause not. Many businesses pay
crooked politicians (lobbying) to give them special privilege. But comparing
to any where else, USA is still pretty good. That's why so many people are
trying to get and stay here.
read some books.
【在 w*****a 的大作中提到】 : 这个“试题”系列已经写了三篇了,分别是历史题(http://www.mitbbs.com/article_t/USANews/33263323.html)、政治题(http://www.mitbbs.com/article_t/USANews/33299315.html)及其番外(http://www.mitbbs.com/article_t/USANews/33312893.html)。接下来就该问经济题了。 : 在经济方面,华人和船粉最关心的就是中产(其实是伪产,因为一次失业一场大病就财 : 产归零了)。中产是个相对概念,其根本是财富占有率。现在中产变中惨,这正是财富 : 占有率减少的表现。中产所失去的财富份额被谁夺走了呢?不是最底层的人,因为他们 : 从过去到现在就不占多少财富。所以只能是0.1%夺取了中产的财富份额。而且这种掠夺 : 还会固化,例如说现在遗产税更加宽松。 : 那么请问黄船粉(甚至包括香蕉船粉),当你们在政治题中喊打喊杀时,是否有真正的 : 勇气从0.1%手中为华人中产(甚至包括其它颜色的中产)夺回财富份额呢?也欢迎非船 : 粉加入讨论。
| w*****a 发帖数: 560 | 5 我读书可能不够多,但还是知道“相对”、“份额”这些概念的,它们都和绝对的总量
没关系,而且就是零和游戏。有的人读书也许多,但别忘了尽信书不如无书,更别忘了
文要对题。
robbed
better
rich
better.
【在 l********l 的大作中提到】 : what kind of stupid question is this? : Economy is not 0-sum game. In a free society, wealth is created, not robbed : by one person from another. : When Tim Cook sells you an iPhone X, did he rob you or you voluntarily pay : him $1000 for it? You must think iPhone X worths at least $1000 to you, : otherwise why would you buy it? The trade makes both you and Tim Cook better : off. : So, the problem is not that the 0.1% has a lot of wealth. If people get rich : through volunteer trades with other people, that means they are producing : goods and services that other people want. The more billionaires the better.
| r*********t 发帖数: 4911 | 6 这百分之0.1%还恰好支持希拉里。你说怪不怪。
【在 s*********r 的大作中提到】 : 川粉有勇气把华人中产的财富送给0.1%, : to Make America Great Again.
|
|