Imo, businesses are just responding to what the government has turned into. Individuals and therefore businesses, will always be greedy. It is human nature. We can not change that.

However, we can change the way the government is organized. If the government is set up in such a way that protects individuals' freedom and liberty (eg. strictly following the constitution), then rent seeking businesses will not be able to lobby for things that provide them with above normal profits while screwing everyone else.

I recommend The Anti-Capitalist Mindset if you want to learn more about why the 99% people hate capitalism.

FWI, I think that a large % of capitalist haters seem to believe that the vast majority of the 1% got their wealth by stealing or scamming others somehow. Not sure where that comes from but that's just an insight from my own experience.

Wealth re-distribution by the government is always a terrible thing. It steps on individual liberties and reduces incentives to create wealth. However, the government goes about this will include a massive amount of waste. Think about how much wealth gets redistributed voluntarily anyway. Billions are given to charitable causes every year.

Who is "we"? I'm not witnessing a collapse of the world's economies; I'm witnessing the cyclical nature of economies in action.

What's happening now has even more historical significance than even most people realize.

Europe is slowly coming to terms with its fiscal and (eventually) political unification.

Perhaps even more significantly, the crisis is truly bringing home, for many, the fact that the world economies are more integrated than ever. It's unprecedented how all the major central banks (BoJapan, Federal Reserve, Russia and everyone else really) are already deeply involved in what's, so far, a supposedly European crisis.

Another thing that one of my politics professors (an authority on war in the field) pointed out to me was how remarkable the thought of use of force isn't even crossing anyone's minds. 70 years ago, the newspaper headlines would be quite different.

People shouldn't automatically dismiss the notion that redistributing money from the rich could be a good thing overall. In his new book, Stiglitz makes a case for redistribution, arguing that it would actually be better for growth and stability.

The ends don't justify the means. If it's not done voluntarily, it's immoral.

Except for the fact that there has never been a government that was chained by a piece of paper. The constitution of the US was violated by the US government almost as soon as it was created. Also, it was written to be especifically vague, but that's not the issue. Republicanism and democracy are forces of de-civilization.

If you want limited government, then what you want is monarchies. Of course, that's impossible nowadays. And it doesn't really solve the core problem. But it's important to understand that the transition from monarchies to republican democracies was not a transition towards more freedom and prosperity, but rather a transition away from respecting property rights and away from civilization, towards barbarism and chaos.

For more on this read Democracy: The God That Failed by Hans-Hermann Hoppe, or just listen to this short 40 minute lecture: World War I as the End of Civilization, by Hoppe

At the end wealth is created by manual labour. The miners and workers who actually build the iphone just dont get the share they would actually deserve. They struggle to survive whereas others take the main profit out of their work.

50 years ago that was still partially true.
Today wealth is created by intellect, not muscles. And what remains of human assembly (most is automated today) is commoditized, which is why it's mostly done in Asia. A free market will always optimize the allocation of resources if left alone. That's practically a tautology.

No, it is not. This concept that labor creates wealth was destroyed over a hundred years ago. This falsehood has destroyed civilizations and I cannot believe to this day people still get indoctrinated to believe it.

Go bust rocks in the middle of no where with a maul for the next ten years and tell me how much wealth you create.

Ah, but where will he get the maul?

Go watch whats left of your wealth without the manual labour and physical work of the vast majority of the population. Have fun running around naked, picking your own grapes for your whine, your beans for your coffee... pretty much anything.

The working class is dependent from the upper class, so is the upper class from the working class. The working class could exist without the upper class though, the upper class couldnt.

Its just that the wealth isnt spread equally or at least a little more fair... and its getting worse day by day

Just because it has yet to be done, does not mean that governments can not be made to follow their constitutions. For example, if legislators faced criminal penalties for proposing anti-constitutional legislation, then that would go a long long way. I'm sure that there are many ways to keep the government in check.

So you think that the guy that builds the iphone could have invented it himself? You're just pissed off that you don't have the ability to invent something like the iphone imo.

On iPhone only for next few days but I'll respond then, til then look up the marginal revolution circa 1871 when virtually the entire civilized world (re)discovered that labor does not create wealth.

Also, wtf are these seemingly homogenous "working class" and "upper class"?