Page 121 of 129 FirstFirst ... 2171111119120121122123 ... LastLast
Results 1,201 to 1,210 of 1288

Thread: Census finds record gap between rich and poor

  1. #1201
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:56 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    67,293

    Re: Census finds record gap between rich and poor

    Quote Originally Posted by donc View Post
    Then show me the link that backs up your OPINION. Not just a link to a generic site but need the page number as well.
    I have shown you the links, given you the actual spreadsheets which you ignored. I stand by my statement and I suggest you go to bea.gov and learn a few things.

  2. #1202
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:56 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    67,293

    Re: Census finds record gap between rich and poor

    Quote Originally Posted by Gray_Fox_86 View Post
    This is the way the majority of the nation works and that helps explain why we are in a bad situation:



    MAKE THIS STORY GO VIRAL -- You Thought California State Pensions Were Out Of Control? Wait Until You See This List From*Illinois - Home - The Daily Bail

    All the meanwhile politicians have people fighting about the rich, they are giving themselves inflated pensions and salaries.
    Thanks for the post, quite telling and you are exactly right, this is why this country is in a complete mess. There are no pension plans in the private sector that pay these kind of pensions.

  3. #1203
    Sage

    Donc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    out yonder
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:28 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    9,426

    Re: Census finds record gap between rich and poor

    Conservative

    I have shown you the links, given you the actual spreadsheets which you ignored.
    I must have overlooked the link that was with that spreadsheet;care to show me again?

    I stand by my statement and I suggest you go to bea.gov and learn a few things.
    Then you stand by what i have proved wrong with BLS data backing me up.Have a good day.
    The haggardness of poverty is everywhere seen contrasted with the sleekness of wealth, the exhorted labor of some compensating for the idleness of others, wretched hovels by the side of stately colonnades, the rags of indigence blended with the ensigns of opulence; in a word, the most useless profusion in the midst of the most urgent wants.Jean-Baptiste Say

  4. #1204
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:56 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    67,293

    Re: Census finds record gap between rich and poor

    Quote Originally Posted by donc View Post
    I must have overlooked the link that was with that spreadsheet;care to show me again?



    Then you stand by what i have proved wrong with BLS data backing me up.Have a good day.

    I always have good days, it serves no purpose posting links that show economic growth, tax revenue, unemployment, employment to anyone whose mind is made up like yours. For some reason you continue to buy what you are told by leftwing politicians whose sole goal is to keep you dependent and you ignore anything that refutes their rhetoric.

    Here is GDP Growth by Year

    GDP
    1980 2,788.10
    1981 3,126.80
    1982 3253.20
    1983 3534.60
    1984 3930.90
    1985 4217.50
    1986 4460.10
    1987 4736.40
    1988 5100.40
    1989 5482.10
    1990 5800.50
    1991 5992.10
    1992 6342.30
    1993 6667.40
    1994 7085.20
    1995 7414.70
    1996 7838.50
    1997 8332.40
    1998 8793.50
    1999 9353.50
    2000 9951.50
    2001 10286.20
    2002 10642.30
    2003 11142.10
    2004 11867.80
    2005 12638.40
    2006 13398.90
    2007 14077.60
    2008 14441.40
    2009 14256.30


    Notice Reagan and Bush economic growth and then notice Clinton economic growth when the GOP repealed much of the Clinton tax increases.

    Here is the tax revenue from 2000-2008

    2000 3,132
    2001 3,118
    2002 2,987
    2003 3,043
    2004 3,265
    2005 3,659
    2006 3,996
    2007 4,197
    2008 4,072

    Here is the unemployment by year

    Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
    2000 5708 5858 5733 5481 5758 5651 5747 5853 5625 5534 5639 5634
    2001 6023 6089 6141 6271 6226 6484 6583 7042 7142 7694 8003 8258
    2002 8182 8215 8304 8599 8399 8393 8390 8304 8251 8307 8520 8640
    2003 8520 8618 8588 8842 8957 9266 9011 8896 8921 8732 8576 8317
    2004 8370 8167 8491 8170 8212 8286 8136 7990 7927 8061 7932 7934
    2005 7784 7980 7737 7672 7651 7524 7406 7345 7553 7453 7566 7279
    2006 7059 7185 7075 7122 6977 6998 7154 7097 6853 6728 6883 6784
    2007 7085 6898 6725 6845 6765 6966 7113 7096 7200 7273 7284 7696
    2008 7628 7435 7793 7631 8397 8560 8895 9509 9569 10172 10617 11400
    2009 11919 12714 13310 13816 14518 14721 14534 14993 15159 15612 15340 15267
    2010 14837 14871 15005 15260 14973 14623 14599 14860 14767 14843

    Discouraged workers
    2008 467 396 401 412 400 420 461 381 467 484 608 642
    2009 734 731 685 740 792 793 796 758 706 808 861 929
    2010 1065 1204 994 1197 1083 1207 1185 1110 1209 1219

    Unemployed + Discouraged
    2008 8095 7831 8194 8043 8797 8980 9356 9890 10036 10656 11225 12042
    2009 12653 13445 13995 14556 15310 15514 15330 15751 15865 16420 16201 16196
    2010 15902 16075 15999 16457 16056 15830 15784 15970 15976 16062 0 0

    Reagan cut taxes that went into effect in 1982

    GW Bush cut tax rates and changed withholding in July 2003

    Amazing how GDP Doubled during Reagan and went up 4.5 trillion during Bush. What other spreadsheet do you want?

  5. #1205
    Sage

    Donc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    out yonder
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:28 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    9,426

    Re: Census finds record gap between rich and poor

    Quote Originally Posted by Conservative View Post
    I always have good days, it serves no purpose posting links that show economic growth, tax revenue, unemployment, employment to anyone whose mind is made up like yours. For some reason you continue to buy what you are told by leftwing politicians whose sole goal is to keep you dependent and you ignore anything that refutes their rhetoric.

    Here is GDP Growth by Year

    GDP
    1980 2,788.10
    1981 3,126.80
    1982 3253.20
    1983 3534.60
    1984 3930.90
    1985 4217.50
    1986 4460.10
    1987 4736.40
    1988 5100.40
    1989 5482.10
    1990 5800.50
    1991 5992.10
    1992 6342.30
    1993 6667.40
    1994 7085.20
    1995 7414.70
    1996 7838.50
    1997 8332.40
    1998 8793.50
    1999 9353.50
    2000 9951.50
    2001 10286.20
    2002 10642.30
    2003 11142.10
    2004 11867.80
    2005 12638.40
    2006 13398.90
    2007 14077.60
    2008 14441.40
    2009 14256.30


    Notice Reagan and Bush economic growth and then notice Clinton economic growth when the GOP repealed much of the Clinton tax increases.

    Here is the tax revenue from 2000-2008

    2000 3,132
    2001 3,118
    2002 2,987
    2003 3,043
    2004 3,265
    2005 3,659
    2006 3,996
    2007 4,197
    2008 4,072

    Here is the unemployment by year

    Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
    2000 5708 5858 5733 5481 5758 5651 5747 5853 5625 5534 5639 5634
    2001 6023 6089 6141 6271 6226 6484 6583 7042 7142 7694 8003 8258
    2002 8182 8215 8304 8599 8399 8393 8390 8304 8251 8307 8520 8640
    2003 8520 8618 8588 8842 8957 9266 9011 8896 8921 8732 8576 8317
    2004 8370 8167 8491 8170 8212 8286 8136 7990 7927 8061 7932 7934
    2005 7784 7980 7737 7672 7651 7524 7406 7345 7553 7453 7566 7279
    2006 7059 7185 7075 7122 6977 6998 7154 7097 6853 6728 6883 6784
    2007 7085 6898 6725 6845 6765 6966 7113 7096 7200 7273 7284 7696
    2008 7628 7435 7793 7631 8397 8560 8895 9509 9569 10172 10617 11400
    2009 11919 12714 13310 13816 14518 14721 14534 14993 15159 15612 15340 15267
    2010 14837 14871 15005 15260 14973 14623 14599 14860 14767 14843

    Discouraged workers
    2008 467 396 401 412 400 420 461 381 467 484 608 642
    2009 734 731 685 740 792 793 796 758 706 808 861 929
    2010 1065 1204 994 1197 1083 1207 1185 1110 1209 1219

    Unemployed + Discouraged
    2008 8095 7831 8194 8043 8797 8980 9356 9890 10036 10656 11225 12042
    2009 12653 13445 13995 14556 15310 15514 15330 15751 15865 16420 16201 16196
    2010 15902 16075 15999 16457 16056 15830 15784 15970 15976 16062 0 0

    Reagan cut taxes that went into effect in 1982

    GW Bush cut tax rates and changed withholding in July 2003

    Amazing how GDP Doubled during Reagan and went up 4.5 trillion during Bush. What other spreadsheet do you want?
    Give the link to the page that came from, I kinda like seeing things in context.
    The haggardness of poverty is everywhere seen contrasted with the sleekness of wealth, the exhorted labor of some compensating for the idleness of others, wretched hovels by the side of stately colonnades, the rags of indigence blended with the ensigns of opulence; in a word, the most useless profusion in the midst of the most urgent wants.Jean-Baptiste Say

  6. #1206
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:56 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    67,293

    Re: Census finds record gap between rich and poor

    Quote Originally Posted by donc View Post
    Give the link to the page that came from, I kinda like seeing things in context.
    Go to bea.gov and click on the link to GDP and then go to the BLS.gov to get the unemployment

  7. #1207
    Sage

    Donc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    out yonder
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:28 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    9,426

    Re: Census finds record gap between rich and poor

    Quote Originally Posted by Conservative View Post
    Go to bea.gov and click on the link to GDP and then go to the BLS.gov to get the unemployment
    Seeing as you haven’t provided a link to where you got your figures I can only assume that you pulled it out of the air, are possibly somewhere else. My site is a Gov site as well and the numbers that you cite don’t jibe with mine. While were on my site, check this out.


    The year 2001, our country had receipts of "2,020.3" that year we had a bottom line number of 34.2 without one of these next to it-.

    Comes 2002, we had receipts of ‘1,859.3” but it had one of these next to it.- preceded with this number “278”.Hhmm…don’t like the looks of them minus signs.

    Whoo..doggies, these minus signs are getting serous now. Surely, unlike the “The Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001” that produced the first – minus sign, the

    “Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003”
    will not do the same.

    Alas and alack, along comes the year of "2003",with these numbers “1885.1” with a –minus "422.2". How can this be? Surely we…no,no, its to frightful to be…payen someones tax-cuts with borrowed money from...a commie country..nah.

    Sigh,”2004” rolls in with a 2013.9 draggen a big fat –426.8 behind it. This s*** cant go on…CAN IT?

    "2005" brought us a “2290.1” and look what popped out of the friggin Rabbit Hole with it. A NEGATIVE 352.4-

    2006……………….bizarreo.."2524.5" with a –247.2

    2007………………bizarreo.."2654.7" with a –315

    2008………………bizarreo.. "2503.1" with a-755.2

    Sadly, what all of these numbers mean is were borrowing money from a Communist country, China, to pay the top 2% of our populations tax cuts. Here look for yourself.


    U.S. Department of Commerce. Bureau of Economic Analysis
    The haggardness of poverty is everywhere seen contrasted with the sleekness of wealth, the exhorted labor of some compensating for the idleness of others, wretched hovels by the side of stately colonnades, the rags of indigence blended with the ensigns of opulence; in a word, the most useless profusion in the midst of the most urgent wants.Jean-Baptiste Say

  8. #1208
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:56 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    67,293

    Re: Census finds record gap between rich and poor

    Quote Originally Posted by donc View Post
    Seeing as you haven’t provided a link to where you got your figures I can only assume that you pulled it out of the air, are possibly somewhere else. My site is a Gov site as well and the numbers that you cite don’t jibe with mine. While were on my site, check this out.


    The year 2001, our country had receipts of "2,020.3" that year we had a bottom line number of 34.2 without one of these next to it-.

    Comes 2002, we had receipts of ‘1,859.3” but it had one of these next to it.- preceded with this number “278”.Hhmm…don’t like the looks of them minus signs.

    Whoo..doggies, these minus signs are getting serous now. Surely, unlike the “The Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001” that produced the first – minus sign, the

    “Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003”
    will not do the same.

    Alas and alack, along comes the year of "2003",with these numbers “1885.1” with a –minus "422.2". How can this be? Surely we…no,no, its to frightful to be…payen someones tax-cuts with borrowed money from...a commie country..nah.

    Sigh,”2004” rolls in with a 2013.9 draggen a big fat –426.8 behind it. This s*** cant go on…CAN IT?

    "2005" brought us a “2290.1” and look what popped out of the friggin Rabbit Hole with it. A NEGATIVE 352.4-

    2006……………….bizarreo.."2524.5" with a –247.2

    2007………………bizarreo.."2654.7" with a –315

    2008………………bizarreo.. "2503.1" with a-755.2

    Sadly, what all of these numbers mean is were borrowing money from a Communist country, China, to pay the top 2% of our populations tax cuts. Here look for yourself.


    U.S. Department of Commerce. Bureau of Economic Analysis
    You can assume whatever you want because quite frankly it doesn't matter to me. The American people get it and spoke on Tuesday night. Seems that the majority believe the numbers I posted and if you really cared you would do your own research and verify what I have provided to you. 682 State legislatures turned over to the GOP and Republicans took over the house. They did so not because of what happened during the Bush administration but instead because what Obama has done. His record speaks for itself. He couldn't have inherited what he helped create.

    You don't seem to have a basic understanding of how our govt. works. Please take a civics class. We have three equal branches of govt. and Congress controls the purse strings, not the President. Debt isn't created by the President, it is created by the Congress regardless of anything you post.

    President Obama took over during a recession that he did nothing to prevent. There was a banking crisis that happened in 2008. TARP was created and passed by President Bush. That is the program that saved the banks, Obama did nothing to prevent the bank failures. TARP cost 700 billion dollars. Bush spent 350 billion and left the other 350 billion for Obama. Obama spent 150 billion of that 350 billion so the total was 500 billion spent. He still has 200 billion that no one know what he has done with it, just like no one knows what he did with the repayment yet he claims he inherited a budget deficit from Bush. You and the other Obama minions bought the rhetoric but never stopped to think how President Bush created a 1.3 trillion dollar deficit from October 1, 2008 to January 21, 2009. Please answer that question. Then banks that were bailed out under TARP paid back the funds with interest. hundreds of billions of dollars were paid back in 2009. Where did that payback go? Questions that everyone should be asking. How about an answer?

    Barack Obama took over passed a 800+billion stimulus plan that was for shovel ready jobs. We now find out he bailed out teacher unions and "saved" teachers' jobs. Since when are teachers' jobs shovel ready projects and since when is it the Federal Govt. job to save state jobs? Questions again but no answers from Obama supporters.

    So, Donc, you can continue to live in the past,, ignore actual results of both the past and the present all of which make you look foolish. Anytime you want to discuss the Obama record let me know. Until then the American people got it, why haven't you?

  9. #1209
    Student
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    98053
    Last Seen
    04-19-15 @ 03:17 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    264

    Re: Census finds record gap between rich and poor

    Quote Originally Posted by Conservative View Post
    Do you work for the govt, or are you in school and don't pay any taxes at all? Only in the liberal world are tax cuts an expense to the Federal Govt. Tax rate cuts have only happened three times in modern history, JFK, Reagan, and Bush and during all three Administrations GDP Grew as did Govt. revenue.
    This seems to be about as meaningless statistic as I can find. I just checked the numbers for GDP and I can't find any President since Coolidge where the GDP was lower at the end of their administration than at the beginning. Didn't matter if taxes are raised or lowered. The GDP always goes up, unless there is a repeat of the Great Depression where the GDP went down for the years '29-'34.

    The historical record of the taxes (I hate the term "government revenue") collected by the federal government went up every year. In fact, since 1950, there doesn't seem to be any 8 year period where the federal taxes didn't double. GDP goes up, taxes go up.

    If you say that cutting taxed increases GDP and the growth in GDP makes up for the cut in taxes, that is not evident. The rated of GDP growth does not correlate with tax cuts, at least not individual tax cuts. The things that seem to have the most effect on the rate of growth are those cuts that effect capital investment. Capital accumulation in the hands of individuals is counter productive. The Reagan cuts on individual rates was accompanied by the Accelerated Cost Recovery System which rewarded companies who invested in new equipment. The Clinton tax cut (which you attribute to the GOP) was not a cut in individual rates. It did cut capital gains which, again, had an effect on capital investment. The tax cut under Clinton did not come close to matching the tax increase at the beginning of his administration. The economy grew after them too as did the federal tax.

    And the Obama tax cut on individuals as a percentage of GDP was orders of magnitude larger than the Clinton tax cut on capital gains. If there is any causality that can be gained from this data it's that incenting business to make capital investments IN THE US, is the thing that does the most to improve the economy and employment.
    Last edited by zip98053; 11-06-10 at 12:41 AM.

  10. #1210
    Student
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    98053
    Last Seen
    04-19-15 @ 03:17 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    264

    Re: Census finds record gap between rich and poor

    Quote Originally Posted by Conservative View Post
    You don't seem to have a basic understanding of how our govt. works. Please take a civics class. We have three equal branches of govt. and Congress controls the purse strings, not the President. Debt isn't created by the President, it is created by the Congress regardless of anything you post.

    President Obama took over during a recession that he did nothing to prevent. There was a banking crisis that happened in 2008. TARP was created and passed by President Bush. That is the program that saved the banks, Obama did nothing to prevent the bank failures.
    In one paragraph, you lay all responsibility for expenditures on Congress. In the next, you say "TARP was created and passed by Bush." It can't be both. In fact, Bush did propose EESA (TARP was Obama), and I think that it was a good thing that he did least the economy be much worse than it is. However, when TARP was voted in Congress, it was the Democrats (including a certain Senator from Il) who railed behind the President to try to save the economy (In the House Yea D-172 R-91, Nay D-91 R-63. In the Senate Yea D-39 R 34, Nay D-9 R-15). So, if EESA did save the banks, and Obama voted for it, doesn't that mean that he did something to help the banks?

    Also, if Congress is the entity that controls the purse strings, and EESA saved the banks, and Congress was controlled by Democrats, and it was the Democrats who passed the measure, doesn't that mean that the Democrats in Congress saved the banks and not Bush? I think that Bush contributed but if you want to attribute it all to Congress, that's your choice.
    Last edited by zip98053; 11-06-10 at 01:15 AM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •