• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Ap survey: Us income gap is holding back economy

Productivity is increasing because over the last 30 years we've come up with lots and lots of ways to be more productive with less hands on a project. One person can design a widget and feed the details into a machine that can knock them out by the thousand. We don't need a whole string of assemblers, welders, nut turners, etc.

So then havent we moved on from the reason that "people are lazy and wont work as hard" to the reason that "technology has increased the ability for one person to make a lot of things very easily"?
As this study points out several key things come to mind:
Firslty productivity is defined as: "Productivity growth, which is the growth of the output of goods and services per hour worked, provides the basis for the growth of living standards"
--We not only are doing more work but working longer

And also

"First, as shown in Figure B, average hourly compensation—which includes the pay of CEOs and day laborers alike—grew just 39.2 percent from 1973 to 2011, far lagging productivity growth. In short, workers, on average, have not seen their pay keep up with productivity. This partly reflects the first wedge: an overall shift in how much of the income in the economy is received in wages by workers and how much is received by owners of capital. The share going to workers decreased."
The wedges between productivity and median compensation growth | Economic Policy Institute
 
What happened during the 40's, 50's, 60's, and 70's? Had much of the same programs around and was not even close to this giant income gap.

Have you ever been to see the mansions in Newport R.I. where the mega wealthy of the time had their summer houses? Forget about the Robber Barrons?
 
Ah! More taxes. How is giving more money to the government going to help?

1.)redistributing wealth
2.)we have a massive deficit/debt
3.)times when we had higher taxes we had less inequality
 
Ah! More taxes. How is giving more money to the government going to help?

The way I look at it, we vote for the government that then decides how much money to spend. Once they do that they have the responsibility to raise the revenues to pay for what they spent.
 
The way I look at it, we vote for the government that then decides how much money to spend. Once they do that they have the responsibility to raise the revenues to pay for what they spent.

Well that seems like a good disincentive to vote.
 
Have you ever been to see the mansions in Newport R.I. where the mega wealthy of the time had their summer houses? Forget about the Robber Barrons?
Your point being......???
 
1.)redistributing wealth
2.)we have a massive deficit/debt
3.)times when we had higher taxes we had less inequality

So, income equality achieved bringing people down vice bringing people up? Ya know, the Russians tried that and it didn't work too well.
 
So, income equality achieved bringing people down vice bringing people up? Ya know, the Russians tried that and it didn't work too well.

So we were like Russia in the 40-70's? (this is where you usually dont respond)
 
The way I look at it, we vote for the government that then decides how much money to spend. Once they do that they have the responsibility to raise the revenues to pay for what they spent.

No, they are responsible to spend wisely and within their limits.
 
what is holding back the economy is too many people thinking others need to take care of them


And people who want your labor but don't want to pay a decent wage for it.
 
So we were like Russia in the 40-70's? (this is where you usually dont respond)

We will be, if we do what you suggest. It'll close the gap alright...everybody will be poor. (This is where you usually come up with another insult)
 
Your point being......???

That we have had income inequality for a long time. I have advocated another tax bracket, not for the upper middle class but for the true mega wealthy. Perhaps a bracket that starts at $ 5-10 million.
 
And people who want your labor but don't want to pay a decent wage for it.

decent wage being a stupid term. Fair market wage is more realistic and a fair market wage is the one that obtains a sufficient quality and quantity of labor for the offering employers
 
So then havent we moved on from the reason that "people are lazy and wont work as hard" to the reason that "technology has increased the ability for one person to make a lot of things very easily"?
As this study points out several key things come to mind:
Firslty productivity is defined as: "Productivity growth, which is the growth of the output of goods and services per hour worked, provides the basis for the growth of living standards"
--We not only are doing more work but working longer

And also

"First, as shown in Figure B, average hourly compensation—which includes the pay of CEOs and day laborers alike—grew just 39.2 percent from 1973 to 2011, far lagging productivity growth. In short, workers, on average, have not seen their pay keep up with productivity. This partly reflects the first wedge: an overall shift in how much of the income in the economy is received in wages by workers and how much is received by owners of capital. The share going to workers decreased."
The wedges between productivity and median compensation growth | Economic Policy Institute

Nope. We haven't moved off that much if at all.

What we are running into is either an unwillingness or an inability of people to make the necessary moves to get themselves back into a productive position. That also explains the change in your EPI quote.

If your job used to be "assembly technician" and 10 years ago a robot took your job that sucks but it doesn't mean that you can't or shouldn't retrain into another position.
 
decent wage being a stupid term. Fair market wage is more realistic and a fair market wage is the one that obtains a sufficient quality and quantity of labor for the offering employers



fair market wage is defined by those who control the capital... how convenient...
 
fair market wage is defined by those who control the capital... how convenient...

Fair market wage is determined by the supply of qualified labor...
 
fair market wage is defined by those who control the capital... how convenient...

your definition is based on nothing objective and would require an employer to pay different people different wages for the same amount and quality of work.

the current system isn't perfect but subjective based of From each according to their ability to each according to their "needs" is patent crap
 
fair market wage is defined by those who control the capital... how convenient...

Not really. It's determined by the benefit the guy with the money gets from the use of your services.

As an example, I can find tech guys all over the place that will bill me between 60 and 80 dollars an hour for their services. The guy I use (primarily) charges $125/hr but when he works on something it's fixed and when he tells me he'll be over in an hour he either makes it or lets me know why he can't make it. I pay the other guys their $60 to hook a new computer to the network or check my backups but I call my "premium" guy when I need more significant work done.

When I hire a bookkeeper I pay based on how efficiently they do the job, how much additional direction they need and how far they can take the process. If all they are doing is straight data entry that only pays $10-12/hr because it only satisfies the most basic of my needs. If the person takes a few additional steps and confers with the client to clear up questions they ran into that pays a little better and if they can not only get the data in but verify it and put it into standard financial statement form I'll pay 3 or 4 times what I do the data entry only person.
 
your definition is based on nothing objective and would require an employer to pay different people different wages for the same amount and quality of work.

the current system isn't perfect but subjective based of From each according to their ability to each according to their "needs" is patent crap


Are you keeping up with who you're talking to? I never quoted the commie manifesto, nor defined anything.
 
Back
Top Bottom