Have you any notion or idea of just who holds most of the wealth?

How about wages have not increased nearly as much as profits have over the last 40 years.
Do you pay any attention to the information about how few control the most wealth?
You have been supporting the politics that have made this all possible.

Who keeps getting the tax breaks under right-wing government?

Just keep drinking the Kool-Aid.
Just remember that their are as many or more voters who are independent as there are members of any political party.

And who gets the tax breaks under left wing government? The same people you are railing about that's who!

Redistribution of wealth has never worked in the long term. Whenever someone tries to even the playing field by increasing taxes or imposing harder regulations on the wealthy, it is the small business which is hit hard while the wealthy businesses either use loopholes or outsource. They do not suffer. Jobs are reduced and the employees and small businesses suffer. That the very wealthy are out for their own interests I take as a given. The problem is what can be done about it without harming employees and small businesses?

Imposed higher wages sounds great until the employee who use to get by with their old wages, and applaud the higher wages; have their hours cut or lose their job. Sounding good is not a reason to apply new laws, rules, or regulations. It should be the starting point to research the long term consequences of making the desired change.

Wages increase when employees are scarce. Whether it be because the job in question has fewer qualified people who can do it, or because businesses are expanding and more employees are needed. Then companies have to compete for the employees.

And who gets the tax breaks under left wing government? The same people you are railing about that's who!

Redistribution of wealth has never worked in the long term. Whenever someone tries to even the playing field by increasing taxes or imposing harder regulations on the wealthy, it is the small business which is hit hard while the wealthy businesses either use loopholes or outsource. They do not suffer. Jobs are reduced and the employees and small businesses suffer. That the very wealthy are out for their own interests I take as a given. The problem is what can be done about it without harming employees and small businesses?

Imposed higher wages sounds great until the employee who use to get by with their old wages, and applaud the higher wages; have their hours cut or lose their job. Sounding good is not a reason to apply new laws, rules, or regulations. It should be the starting point to research the long term consequences of making the desired change.

Wages increase when employees are scarce. Whether it be because the job in question has fewer qualified people who can do it, or because businesses are expanding and more employees are needed. Then companies have to compete for the employees.

And who gets the tax breaks under left wing government? The same people you are railing about that's who!

Redistribution of wealth has never worked in the long term. Whenever someone tries to even the playing field by increasing taxes or imposing harder regulations on the wealthy, it is the small business which is hit hard while the wealthy businesses either use loopholes or outsource. They do not suffer. Jobs are reduced and the employees and small businesses suffer. That the very wealthy are out for their own interests I take as a given. The problem is what can be done about it without harming employees and small businesses?

Imposed higher wages sounds great until the employee who use to get by with their old wages, and applaud the higher wages; have their hours cut or lose their job. Sounding good is not a reason to apply new laws, rules, or regulations. It should be the starting point to research the long term consequences of making the desired change.

Wages increase when employees are scarce. Whether it be because the job in question has fewer qualified people who can do it, or because businesses are expanding and more employees are needed. Then companies have to compete for the employees.

There is no two ways about this issue:
Wages for the average worker have loss ground over the last 40 years.
Either the problem leaves you getting less than you deserve or you are getting more than you deserve.
You are either a victim or perpetuator of the scheme.

It either costs you or you gain from it.

As to the small business owner.
If the person they are looking for to buy what they sell has more money it is much better for him than his banker getting more. Or for the producer to get higher profits.

There is too much interest in the person at the top of the food chain getting more & each person down that chain gaining less.

All to soon people miss that most of the wealth keeps going up the chain & staying there.
It is all a big Ponzi chain. The first ones gains big & each one following gets less.

Well there can never be a truly fair & just system when playing by the rules of Ponzi schemes.
Few winners many losers.

You may think your potion in the chain will serve you well.

I think there is going to be a big awaking & many Ponzi schemes will fail.
This will be bad for those in first & an awakening for most others.

But every time regulations or tax hikes are made to target big businesses, it is the small businesses who get hit the hardest. And job losses also occur. I agree that there has been a widening gap over several decades between the finances of the rich and poor. But every time a policy is put in place to try to correct the issue through increased taxes and regulations, it is the small businesses and middle class who suffer. Instead of looking to punish those who are wealthy, no matter how unfair it looks; a better way is to reward them for providing more jobs to Americans and not abroad. While imposing consequences, not for big profits, but for outsourcing jobs. Making American companies pay tariffs to bring their foreign made goods home for sale; is one way to do so.

This is the capitalistic way of doing things.
You need to get out more that you put in.
The greater the profit the better.

The game is all about drawing the wealth from the bottom.
If you are in the middle you have to keep passing more to the top.
If there is less at the bottom to draw on there is less for you to keep.
The top is a greedy thing to feed.

So as the poor gets poor the middle has less to pass on.
So some of the middles gain has to be passed on.
Then some of the middle becomes poorer.

You like this system so perhaps if your not ending up with you fair share you should look to where that money is really going.

No and I have no problem subsidizing the small independent farmers so don’t even say that garbage. My problem is the commercial farmers are getting most of the farm subsidies.
But I have a problem with Trump creating a crisis then pays off the farmers for a self inflicted problem using socialism.
Now farm

Now again you miss the basis of the topic and you love farm subsidies and that is socialism. So Trump creates a crisis and uses socialism to pay off the farmers.

Oh I find your comment again lacking any common sense not allowing a socialist country like China to hose us. So Trump levies Tariffs tells his base that China is paying the tariffs when the American consumer is paying in the form of higher cost for China imports but its difficult for a Trump supporters to grasp that concept. Now as far as China being socialist they are a form of socialism but they are communist but also they have private enterprise and markets that dominate their daily life.

But China has socialism just like Trump when he gives away our tax dollars to the commercial farmers for a crisis Trump created with his tariffs that created a world wide trade war.

So the we the people comment, you people have no problem with Trump tariffs creating a world wide trade war increasing the trade deficit from$628 billion to $864 billion using a socialist program to pay off farmers so the hosing got worse.
Not to mention the tariffs have increased inflation.