• 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!

Inequality Troubles Americans Across Party Lines, Times/CBS Poll Finds

MTAtech

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 4, 2013
Messages
36,520
Reaction score
35,420
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/04/b...issue-for-americans-times-cbs-poll-finds.html

Americans are broadly concerned about inequality of wealth and income despite an economy that has improved by most measures, a sentiment that is already driving the 2016 presidential contest, according to a New York Times/CBS News poll.

The poll found that a strong majority say that wealth should be more evenly divided and that it is a problem that should be addressed urgently. Nearly six in 10 Americans said government should do more to reduce the gap between the rich and the poor, but they split sharply along partisan lines. Only one-third of Republicans supported a more active government role, versus eight in 10 of Democrats.
 
Pretty much confirms that republicans vote against their own interests. Dem candidates at least pay lip service to fixing inequality. They do little about it, but the repub candidates and voters seem to be in complete fantasy land. I mean if government won't do anything about it, who else will, the corporate overlords? Maybe the fairy godmother?
 
This country was founded by rebelling against an aristocracy. We have built a new aristocracy, ensuring that the rich are very very rich and stay that way across generations, while poverty is inherited and the lower middle class has little chance to move up. Of course that troubles us. It is antithetical to everything we believe in. Unfortunately, we try to pretend that this problem doesn't exist and many people oppose measures to equal the playing field because they don't want anything holding them down when they become rich.
 

A " Strong majority " are for wealth redistribution ?

In Greece maybe, or Venezuela, or Argentina.

Not in this Country by any means.

And the economy has " improved by most measures " ?? How can you post this crap ?

Oh thats right, you put ideology before the needs and concerns of Millions of Americans who continue to struggle under this President

Pretend they're not there so you can push this drivel.
 
Pretty much confirms that republicans vote against their own interests. Dem candidates at least pay lip service to fixing inequality. They do little about it, but the repub candidates and voters seem to be in complete fantasy land. I mean if government won't do anything about it, who else will, the corporate overlords? Maybe the fairy godmother?

Republicans have recently been paying more attention to it. Mostly as a way to bash Obama, but I could care less as to the "why", I'm just happy that it's looking more and more like they are going to make it a major campaign issue.

The downside of republicans taking up this issue is that they might do really stupid stuff, like blaming income inequality on the existence of minimum wage and pushing to get rid of the minimum wage (I know, that doesn't make a lick of sense, but republicans rarely do make any sense). The up side for democrats is that they will have a great opportunity to make any republican running on an inequality platform look like an idiot.
 
When it comes down to it forced wealth redistribution ( theft ) is basically all the left have left as a economic plan for growth.

Its their solution to a problem they made much worse and if its ever implemented it will backfire on the Middle class in epic proportions.
 
When it comes down to it forced wealth redistribution ( theft ) is basically all the left have left as a economic plan for growth.

Its their solution to a problem they made much worse and if its ever implemented it will backfire on the Middle class in epic proportions.

Politically, anything other than that sounds like foolishness as a solution to income disparity.

Other than forced wealth redistribution, the only thing that the government can do is more deficit spending to increase demand and improve our overall economy, but most people are more concerned about the federal debt than income disparity, so that option is off the table, until we stop focusing on the deficit and debt - which won't happen until we get another republican POTUS.
 
The downside of republicans taking up this issue is that they might do really stupid stuff, like blaming income inequality on the existence of minimum wage and pushing to get rid of the minimum wage (I know, that doesn't make a lick of sense, but republicans rarely do make any sense). The up side for democrats is that they will have a great opportunity to make any republican running on an inequality platform look like an idiot.

You continue to present an (I can only assume, at this point, willful) inaccurate depiction of the argument. Conservatives don't argue that MW laws increase income inequality, we argue that it increases unemployment among low-skill laborers, and prices for everyone.



Anywho, I have yet to see anyone present to me good reasons why I should care how successful the very successful are, as opposed to caring about how to make the less successful more so.
 
Politically, anything other than that sounds like foolishness as a solution to income disparity.

Other than forced wealth redistribution, the only thing that the government can do is more deficit spending to increase demand and improve our overall economy, but most people are more concerned about the federal debt than income disparity, so that option is off the table, until we stop focusing on the deficit and debt - which won't happen until we get another republican POTUS.

Wrong...wow !

The Government can incentivize new investment in our economy by NOT implementing foolish iniatives like " wealth redistribution ".

It could remove tax penalties for offshore capital

It could have also NOT passed a health care law that mandates higher cost on consumers and businesses under false pretenses.

It could have NOT raised taxes on investment and capital that force investment capital offshore.

It COULD lower Corporate tax rates, undo destructive regulations based on lies about AGW that are causing the Middle class and the poor to pay higher utility rates.

It could do a number of things other than deficit spending "stimulus to increase aggregate demand " ( which never works ) and mandating higher cost on Bussinesses and consumers.

All the left has is a long list of bad ideas. Ideas based on narratives and talking points that have all their value wrapped up in their intentions and not their consequences.

7 years of record low interet rates with Trillions in new debt and now low gas prices and we just saw a contraction.

Unbelievable. And you people want to continue on with this nonsense. Double down on it no less.
 
:lamo

This is nothing more than the democrat party shills in the media laying an astroturf playing field for the upcoming election. It is how they 'shape' public opinion. "Dont you WANT to see equality? Wouldnt it be swell? Shouldnt we do more? Who do you think would be more likely to make your dreams come true? Vote democrat!"
 
This country was founded by rebelling against an aristocracy. We have built a new aristocracy, ensuring that the rich are very very rich and stay that way across generations, while poverty is inherited and the lower middle class has little chance to move up. Of course that troubles us. It is antithetical to everything we believe in. Unfortunately, we try to pretend that this problem doesn't exist and many people oppose measures to equal the playing field because they don't want anything holding them down when they become rich.

the natural progression is towards feudalism, which is why it happened the first time, and a few times since then.
 
Politically, anything other than that sounds like foolishness as a solution to income disparity.

Other than forced wealth redistribution, the only thing that the government can do is more deficit spending to increase demand and improve our overall economy, but most people are more concerned about the federal debt than income disparity, so that option is off the table, until we stop focusing on the deficit and debt - which won't happen until we get another republican POTUS.

Simply untrue. Government policy can make a difference. Democrats would not allow business friendly solutions to incenting corporations to move manufacturing to the U.S. Lets remember that NAFTA was voted in under Clinton and Obama wants to craft a similar deal with Asian nations. Anything that would provide tax breaks to move into inner cities would be decried as "giveaways" to big business. Allowing students to pick charter schools so kids can get a better education is ranted about as being anti-union.

On the Republican side any thought of a higher tax rate on the super wealthy is a non-starter. How about changing the rules on donating away wealth upon death like Buffet will do to bypass the estate tax. Why not have a limit on charitable contributions, so the uber wealthy can't build a fancy gym at a university and have your name on it like Nike did.

How about limiting deductions for plants and equipment to those built in the U.S.

So yes there is plenty that can be done but it more fun to accuse the other guy of not caring or being stupid.
 
the natural progression is towards feudalism, which is why it happened the first time, and a few times since then.

I don't think that's the natural progression, because we are always compelled to fight against it. It is only when we ignore that impulse and allow the powerful to abuse that power that we find ourselves in a feudal system or one like it. Maybe they're a warring part of our dual nature. I hope we can nurture the progressive, egalitarian nature more than the other one.
 
When it comes down to it forced wealth redistribution ( theft ) is basically all the left have left as a economic plan for growth.

Its their solution to a problem they made much worse and if its ever implemented it will backfire on the Middle class in epic proportions.

The idea that when wealth is concentrated in few hand trying to redistribute that wealth to those that lack it "doesn't work" has no historical credibility. That's exactly what the nation did to address inequality that existed in the the early part of the 20th Century and was fixed by New Deal policies.

The idea of taxing the rich more goes back to Adam Smith and The Wealth of Nations.

This IMF paper on redistribution and growth (pdf), concludes that there is no negative effect of redistributionist policies. What is does do is reduce inequality.

Claiming redistribution is "theft"(or as Mitt Romney claimed during his failed Presidential run, that redistribution is un-American) is silly. We have been redistributing income and wealth for generations. Medicare, for example, is in effect a strongly redistributive program: it’s supported by a payroll tax (and other revenue) in which the amount you pay in depends on your income, but it supplies a benefit that depends only on your medical costs. From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs!

So no, we liberals here aren't radical for suggesting that we should continue to do what we're already doing; the real radicals are the people on the right who want to declare much of what our government has been doing these past three generations illegitimate.
 
Republicans have recently been paying more attention to it. Mostly as a way to bash Obama, but I could care less as to the "why", I'm just happy that it's looking more and more like they are going to make it a major campaign issue.

The downside of republicans taking up this issue is that they might do really stupid stuff, like blaming income inequality on the existence of minimum wage and pushing to get rid of the minimum wage (I know, that doesn't make a lick of sense, but republicans rarely do make any sense). The up side for democrats is that they will have a great opportunity to make any republican running on an inequality platform look like an idiot.

well, maybe it's just me but i kind of think that old men so rich they don't know how many houses they have should not be leading this charge, even if they were sincere (which i highly doubt)

being a campaign issue isn't enough. Remember obama said we have to redistribute the wealth, and that didn't exactly happen. It has to be a central role in the formal debates, and promises at specific legislation. Something tells me the bland centrist hillary isn't looking to stir the pot enough
 
well i have to say as far as forcefully redistributing wealth, dave brandon is exhibit A in why i think this should happen

a complete asshole failure exec of a major athletic department, who stayed up to 4 AM responding to (relatively) polite emails from donors and ticket holders "quit drinking and go to bed" and "find another team to root for"

now he just inked a $15 million/year deal with toys r us, which he'll undoubtedly flip public and then dump his stock

exhibit B would be 2008 global financial meltdown
 
Over the last 30 years, the incomes at the top have gone up 175% while middle class incomes have stagnated and the poor have actually lost ground, That is a huge problem. And the situation becomes even worse.
 
Pretty much confirms that republicans vote against their own interests. Dem candidates at least pay lip service to fixing inequality. They do little about it, but the repub candidates and voters seem to be in complete fantasy land. I mean if government won't do anything about it, who else will, the corporate overlords? Maybe the fairy godmother?

So you vote on lies, knowing they're lies? Does it make you "feel better?"
 
This country was founded by rebelling against an aristocracy. We have built a new aristocracy, ensuring that the rich are very very rich and stay that way across generations, while poverty is inherited and the lower middle class has little chance to move up. Of course that troubles us. It is antithetical to everything we believe in. Unfortunately, we try to pretend that this problem doesn't exist and many people oppose measures to equal the playing field because they don't want anything holding them down when they become rich.

You mean like Obama becoming POTUS? He didn't make that happen, somebody else made that happen.
 
The left wing calss warriors would have us believe that rich people get rich by theft-they don't really earn their money, thus they don't deserve. Therefore, it is just for the central planners to take it and use to do good for society.ow, what better spokespersonn could they have for pushing this idea that rich people don't deserve their wealth.........

hillary_clinton_confused_rtr_img_0.jpg
............than GRANNY CLINTON!!

LOL
 
It's not the govs job to make sure I get ore money.
 
There has never been a country that has given it's people a greater opportunity to be upwardly mobile. Most corporations today started with one person and a dream.
 
Well, I've got just the cure for them: watch Fox News so they can listen to corporate-funded talking heads tell them that they're engaging in "class warfare" for expressing concern over the growing inequality gap.

Why should I care about the gap?
 
Back
Top Bottom