The reality in Libya.

[Winehole23]

Recently read and recommended:

[TeyshaBlue]

When? and more importantly, where is the link supporting your argument that most 1%ers didn't work hard for their money.

The bot doesn't do research. If it's not a blog post or on truthout.borg, he's ing lost.

[johnsmith]

The bot doesn't do research. If it's not a blog post or on truthout.borg, he's ing lost.

I see.....

I just found it interesting how similar his argument was with many of the Occupy type folks that I've seen interviewed.

Reporter: "What is it that you want"?
Boutons: "We want change".
Reporter: "What do you want to change"?
Boutons: "More equal distribution of money".
Reporter: "Why"?
Boutons: "Because most of them didn't even work for their money".
Reporter: "How do you know"?
Boutons: "Well.....because.....errrr.....We are the 99%"!!!!!!


Boutons: " yeah"!!!!

[johnsmith]

But I guess by him not responding in any way shape or form, he can go on with his fantasy " slaps" that he's so proud of.

Crazy .

[boutons_deux]

johnsmith, down on your knees, boy, take your btich-slapping like a man:

"Half of those on the Forbes 400 list started their economic careers by inheriting businesses or substantial wealth. Of these, most inherited sufficient wealth to put them immediately into Forbes' heaven. Only three out of ten on the Forbes list can be regarded as self-starters whose parents did not have great wealth or own a business with more than a few employees.



The data, then, do not support the assumption that the United States is a true meritocracy where the most able rise to their rightful positions. Nor do they defend the contention that the United States is structured so that authentic equality of opportunity prevails. Inheritances undermine the achievement-reward equation.



In 1995, it took only $340 million to break into to the Forbes 400. In 1996, the hurdle was raised to $400 million. By 1997, it was $475 million. The net worth of the wealthiest of the wealthy is increasing much faster than that of the rest of us."

http://www.faireconomy.org/press_roo...997_forbes_400


http://www.amazon.com/Old-Money-Myth.../dp/1880559641

That's the 0.1%.

For the rest of the 1%, many who "made" their fortune inherited some wealth that allows them to start high up the ladder. Then there's a whole class of failed assholes, who might get private college/post-grad educations at $50K/year schools, like dubya, who "inherited" the Bush family circle of wealthy friends and contacts. eg, dubya made $17M on the Texas Rangers stadium deal as a pure gift from Poppy's friends.

Then there are of course "trust fund babies", many in TX whose Daddy OilBucks left them $Ms in a trust fund the interest of which finances a life of leisure.

[TeyshaBlue]

Newsflash: No where in these links is the amount of work addressed...only the amount of money inherited or gifted.

Since you have zero numbers to support your asinine statement, I guess you'll have to fall back on the tried and true, GFY.

Try again, bot.

[TeyshaBlue]

And lol @ Forbes 400 being a meaningful metric of anything.

[Winehole23]

crypto-conservatroid boutonsborg.com flacks the company line, taunts an online opponent (with erotic overtones,) and links to amazon.com

[Winehole23]

Well done, m8!

[Winehole23]

that's Super Adventure Club caliber stuff, man!

[johnsmith]

johnsmith, down on your knees, boy, take your btich-slapping like a man:

"Half of those on the Forbes 400 list started their economic careers by inheriting businesses or substantial wealth. Of these, most inherited sufficient wealth to put them immediately into Forbes' heaven. Only three out of ten on the Forbes list can be regarded as self-starters whose parents did not have great wealth or own a business with more than a few employees.



The data, then, do not support the assumption that the United States is a true meritocracy where the most able rise to their rightful positions. Nor do they defend the contention that the United States is structured so that authentic equality of opportunity prevails. Inheritances undermine the achievement-reward equation.



In 1995, it took only $340 million to break into to the Forbes 400. In 1996, the hurdle was raised to $400 million. By 1997, it was $475 million. The net worth of the wealthiest of the wealthy is increasing much faster than that of the rest of us."

http://www.faireconomy.org/press_roo...997_forbes_400


http://www.amazon.com/Old-Money-Myth.../dp/1880559641

That's the 0.1%.

For the rest of the 1%, many who "made" their fortune inherited some wealth that allows them to start high up the ladder. Then there's a whole class of failed assholes, who might get private college/post-grad educations at $50K/year schools, like dubya, who "inherited" the Bush family circle of wealthy friends and contacts. eg, dubya made $17M on the Texas Rangers stadium deal as a pure gift from Poppy's friends.

Then there are of course "trust fund babies", many in TX whose Daddy OilBucks left them $Ms in a trust fund the interest of which finances a life of leisure.

So there are 1.4 million taxpayers that make up the top 1% and you give me a breakdown (sort of) of 400 people as evidence that these people didn't have to put in any hard work to be a success. Forget about the fact (as Teysha pointed out) that the article says nothing about the amount of work that goes into maintaining that amount of money, but it doesn't even begin to touch on the other 1,399,600 people that are actually in the top 1%.

Good job Boutons, you sure slapped me again.


Maybe you should spend less time on an internet forum ing about the 1% and the VRWC, and more time trying to earn more in order to support what is no doubt a very needy family.

[Winehole23]

Just 350 miles from the tiny European member state Malta, ISIS has set up a colony in Surt, Libya. This Libyan outpost is now receiving veteran fighters and administrators from the burgeoning theocratic blob that has spread across Syria and Iraq. It is from this redoubt in Surt that the Islamic State can project power across North Africa, according to an in-depth report from The New York Times.


Now that we've seen the Islamic State lash out on European soil, the prospect of them establishing a statelet 400 miles from Italy should give us pause. How did they get there? How was Surt made ready to be the Islamic State's caliphate away from the caliphate?


Look no further than the woman most likely to become our next president, Hillary Clinton. Using American power to help overthrow Moammar Gadhafi's government was her signature idea as secretary of state. Surely, the Arab Spring rebels would handle the mop up. Alas, it didn't turn out that way.

http://theweek.com/articles/591387/b...gainst-hillary

[Spurtacular]

Yet, you didn't care one bit about the civilian deaths and displacements.

Not one bit.

You're a hypocrite, plain and simple.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/six-mon...azi-survivors/