Technically you're right but you miss the point. How many jobs does he support with his demand for a gold and diamond encrusted watch that costs 10,000x more than a normal watch? A whole lot fewer jobs than 10,000 normal watch buyers can support. Those normal people drive the economy with their demand, not the rich guy.

So the bank takes the money and... invests it. Refer back to my argument about investing in the previous post. Who's going to buy houses when there's no middle class? Who's going to start or expand their widget business when most people can barely afford their food and rent?

What businesses will be looking to expand in an economy where the wealth concentration is going in the direction it is now? Without a middle class to spend money, there is no demand. Business expansion is driven by demand and demand only. There is no other reason to expand, there is no other reason to hire new workers.

You're wrong. Income inequality is harmful. And not just because it hurts poor people's feelings.

Demand, people buying things, is what drives the economy. Person A that makes 100x the money that Person B does, doesn't add 100x the demand to the economy. One person can only buy so much. So, then, Person A's extra money is either going to go into savings (not good, that money is lost, as far as the rest of the world is concerned) or the money is going to go into investing. Investing plays an important role in the system but it cannot be the basis of the economy, no matter what anyone tries to tell you. Workers are hired and businesses are expanded for no other reason than to fulfill demand.

This is why income inequality is bad. Its growth strangles the economy by shifting money from the masses, who would use that money to drive the economy, to the few who will just put the money into savings when there is nothing worth investing in.

Demand, people buying things, is what drives the economy. Person A that makes 100x the money that Person B does, doesn't add 100x the demand to the economy. One person can only buy so much. So, then, Person A's extra money is either going to go into savings (not good, that money is lost, as far as the economy is concerned) or the money is going into investing. Investing plays an important role in the system but it cannot be the basis of the economy, no matter what anyone tries to tell you. Workers are hired and businesses are expanded for no other reason than to fulfill demand.

This is why income inequality is bad. Its growth strangles the economy by shifting money from the masses, who would use that money to drive the economy, to the few who will just put the money into savings when there is nothing worth investing in.

There would never be enough choice in ISPs that Net Neutrality would be unnecessary. It's simply too expensive to run a dozen or more lines to each home. Even if locals opened up land access to more competition, it's likely that the few small/medium companies that actually popped up would be bought up by their larger competitors. We'd wind up with the same thing we have in the cellular service industry: a few choices, but none of them good. The ISPs that are left will always favor "fast lane" style service because it is going to be profitable for them.

Shut the hell up Bennet.

Allow me to add one gripe. Creating an outline for text in GIMP requires creating a selection from the text, creating a new layer, growing the selection to the outline size, and filling the selection with the new color. WTF? What if I want to change the text now? I have to redo those steps all over again because the outline is in no way associated with the text. It's just a separate object. That's absurd.

No, YOU must have missed the whole Climategate thing.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C...

And then do what with the detainees? No one in America dared invite them into their state.

I have never seen a commercial for home internet service that is explicitly unlimited it's usually:

Blazing* Fast** High-Speed*** Internet**** Up to***** 50****** megs******* for only******** $69.99 per month*********

* Our lawyers advise us to tell you that we are not liable any house fires that may or may not be related to your internet equipment.
** When compared to dial up internet from 20 years ago
*** Only available during off-peak hours
**** Until we decide to deny access to websites that don't pay us for the privilege of being carried to our customers
***** But never actually anywhere near....
****** Random number picked out of a hat, you'll never actually get this
******* Bits? Bytes? Who cares! (Personal story: I asked the Comcast salesmen if he meant megabits or megabytes when he said "50 megs" and he had no idea...)
******** Introductory rate for new customers only. We will double the rates in 3 months after joining
********* Plus taxes, fees, extra charges, and tribute payments

The way I see it, calling someone who only plays Candy Crush a gamer is like calling someone who only plays Putt Putt a golfer. As for the number of hours and the amount of dedication, they can be indicated with qualifiers like "Occasional", "Casual", or "Hardcore".