[Oldeconomybuyer]

[bert]

The primary reason for income inequality is people inequality.

People are not equal and will never have equal income if they are living free

Freedom yields the ability to excel

[duckman]

Is he sitting or standing on a box.

[ClearCase_guy]

Equal opportunity is a good thing.
Equal outcome is tyranny.

[BitWielder1]

This is at least the third time this week Bloomie has been shamed for telling the truth in the past.

[Redwood71]

That was back when he was trying to be right. Now he runs under the guise of the left. And I’m not sure he knows, or cares about, the difference.

rwood

[BitWielder1]

Liberal illusion of equality: Everybody will live like billionaires.
Reality: Everybody will have to scrape by on minimum wage.
Except the political elite and their cronies of course.

[mjp]

- the principle of freedom of economic inequality is a necessary condition for expansion and intensification of the division of labor, which is necessary for the increased productivity of labor, which is necessary for increased total productive ability, which is necessary for economic progress, which is necessary for mass prosperity

- the principle of freedom of economic inequality is the result of rationality, which means it is compatible with reality, reason, human nature, God-given natural rights, freedom, private property, and pursuit of happiness

- it emerges naturally simply because it is a fact of reality that people are unequal in intelligence, talent, skill, ability, ambition, effort, thriftiness, frugality, parsimony, and all other virtues and vices.

- it is compatible with the law of causality because it is a consequence of the fact that different individuals enact different degrees of economic causation. (Some individuals are more productive than others)

- the abolition of economic inequality is incompatible with the law of causality. It means the abolition of all connection between an individual’s efforts and his resulting income. It would be tantamount to the abolition of causality in the receipt of income, which would destroy his motivation to produce.

- the abolition of economic inequality destroys true justice because true justice is the process of giving people what they have earned and what they deserve, and social justice means giving people the unearned, the undeserved, and something for nothing, which motivates people to do as little as possible

- the abolition of economic inequality and replacing it with egalitarianism motivates people to demand as much as possible, which means the abolition of cost in the spending of income. This is why leftards are clueless about the cost of their redistribution programs such as socialized medicine and guaranteed income

[nuconvert]

He was a Democrat, then a Republican & now he’s a Dem again.

Which ever way the wind blows & Mike can get on a ticket.

[marktwain]

Business Insider is a far left source.

It is nice to see them going after the greatest source of money for the left today.

[sphinx]

Bloomberg is absolutely right on this. He should have added that moral hazard is a cancer in our welfare system; we massively subsidize irresponsible, dysfunctional behavior. He is also have added that the answer to income inequality is not downward levelling; it's raising up the lower income groups. Full school choice would be a good place to begin. Or shifting all pension plans, including Social Security, to a fully funded, investment account basis to bring all American families into the investor class, generate real wealth accumulation, and develop inheritable assets for the two thirds of American families that have essentially no savings.

Bloomberg was also correct in his comments supporting stop and frisk. He was a successful mayor of NYC, and he supports the police, unlike his successor.

Bloomberg is off the charts looney liberal on enough issues to put him beyond the pale in my book, but I think he would be a formidable opponent for Trump. If he were smart enough to see the opportunity (TBD, though he's pretty smart), he could start by relentlessly mocking Trump's fortune and business record. Bloomberg can out-billionaire Trump, and I think Trump would go ballistic over an opponent who needled him about being poor white trash who inherited enough money to play Jed Clampitt. I don't know if Bloomberg has the knack to troll Trump, but if he does, watch out.

[DesertRhino]

He’s right of course. But it’s gonna be super fun to beat him over the head with it. Lol

[DesertRhino]

If I had a shred of decency I’d stand up and defend him and say he’s right. Like I said... if lol

[DannyTN]