• 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!

Census finds record gap between rich and poor

VanceMack said:
Boo...if the rich continue to excel (get richer) and the poor continue to fail (and are given excuses to fail) then how does ANYONE expect that gap to NOT grow? The reality is that UNLESS the poor shift gears and TRY, they will NEVER succeed. Blaming the rich may make people feeeeel better...but it WILL NOT solve their problems. No amount of handout programs will solve their problems. They HAVE to decide to first and foremost get UP.
Click to expand...
You've brought me right back to what I said earlier, that unless people have access to information (i.e., education) on how to change their social-economic dynamic, they'll never know that there is or can be a better way.

The sad part here is that what UtahBill (and Boo Radley) have mentioned concerning the lack of elementary financial management skills that should be taught at school and in the home was the focus of a recent Senate hearing held just yesterday. It's no wonder so many are finding themselves way below the povery line when something as basic as economics - how to balance a checkbook or prepare a budget - are no longer (or barely) taught in our nation's schools. And that's just the surface of the matter!

If we want the poor to start fending for themselves, they have to be educated that there is better for them other than their present condition. From there, the opportunities have to be created and recognized. Unless and until these things happen, there will always be those who either find themselves on social services program OR dependent/reliant on same to survive.

This linked article isn't exactly what I'm referring to above, but it certainly speaks to the theme of this thread - the disparity in the gap betweent he rich and the poor in this country, and to my argument personally - the fact that not everyone wants to be on social services programs, but sometimes circumstances beyond their control force people to turn to such programs. For some, such programs are the last resort.
 
Last edited:
TurtleDude said:
why do you spend so much time advocating other people pay more taxes when they already pay far more than you do?
Click to expand...
Well, its not fair that they have so much more than him - so he blindly supports the people that promise to even things out.
He's entitled, after all.
 
Objective Voice said:
You've brought me right back to what I said earlier, that unless people have access to information (i.e., education) on how to change their social-economic dynamic, they'll never know that there is or can be a better way.

The sad part here is that what UtahBill (and Boo Radley) have mentioned concerning the lack of elementary financial management skills that should be taught at school and in the home was the focus of a recent Senate hearing held just yesterday. It's no wonder so many are finding themselves way below the povery line when something as basic as economics - how to balance a checkbook or prepare a budget - are no longer (or barely) taught in our nation's schools. And that's just the surface of the matter!

If we want the poor to start fending for themselves, they have to be educated that there is better for them other than their present condition. From there, the opportunities have to be created and recognized. Unless and until these things happen, there will always be those who either find themselves on social services program OR dependent/reliant on same to survive.

This linked article isn't exactly what I'm referring to above, but it certainly speaks to the theme of this thread - the disparity in the gap betweent he rich and the poor in this country, and to my argument personally - the fact that not everyone wants to be on social services programs, but sometimes circumstances beyond their control force people to turn to such programs. For some, such programs are the last resort.
Click to expand...

Not playing 'gotcha' debate tactics here...but this is hell and gone from "The rich are stealing from the poor." And I have also said from the outset...by all means...create hand-UP programs...and I'll gladly continue to contribute my PERSONAL resources. I dont need the federal government to pay for my charity and support. However since the new deal the programs have been handout programs that punish progress and keep people poor. That HAS to change if there will ever BE change.
 
VanceMack said:
Boo...if the rich continue to excel (get richer) and the poor continue to fail (and are given excuses to fail) then how does ANYONE expect that gap to NOT grow? The reality is that UNLESS the poor shift gears and TRY, they will NEVER succeed. Blaming the rich may make people feeeeel better...but it WILL NOT solve their problems. No amount of handout programs will solve their problems. They HAVE to decide to first and foremost get UP.
Click to expand...

absolutely but as long as we make failing both comfortable and needed (for the dem party to get votes) it won't change. and bashing the rich won't change anything for the better but might even contribute to the slackers remaining slothful since rich bashing contributes to their mistaken belief that they cannot achieve no matter what.
 
The rich will continue to get richer because they send their children to private schools while the poor have their children going to public schools, where loyalty to the Unions comes before loyalty to the children's education.
 
Grant said:
The rich will continue to get richer because they send their children to private schools while the poor have their children going to public schools, where loyalty to the Unions comes before loyalty to the children's education.
Click to expand...

Bull****! I went to a public school and it was good enough to get several students into universities that are ranked in the top 50 worldwide. And that is with the teachers being loyal to the union and not the student's education. Lets face it when the majority of the classroom is loud and talks back to the teacher it is not necessarily a good thing for education. But still many students went to university and it was public.
 
Grant said:
The rich will continue to get richer because they send their children to private schools while the poor have their children going to public schools, where loyalty to the Unions comes before loyalty to the children's education.
Click to expand...

I would argue this is somewhat correct but its more that the rich people value education more and make certain that their children are well educated (which can mean public schools-some of the best schools in my area are public)
 
Gray_Fox_86 said:
Bull****! I went to a public school and it was good enough to get several students into universities that are ranked in the top 50 worldwide. And that is with the teachers being loyal to the union and not the student's education. Lets face it when the majority of the classroom is loud and talks back to the teacher it is not necessarily a good thing for education. But still many students went to university and it was public.
Click to expand...

I'm quite sure that several students get to University but the odds are greater in private schools than in public.

Public schools are a mess, and that can't be hidden.
 
Grant said:
I'm quite sure that several students get to University but the odds are greater in private schools than in public.

Public schools are a mess, and that can't be hidden.
Click to expand...

true-my prep school has had 100% college attendance for years

but I noted an interesting fact at College. The top students invariably came from the very best private schools or the very competitive public schools (like New Trier in Chicago) New Rochelle in NY etc. The kids who made it to the very top of top public schools were generally the best students. For some reason, the kids who went to parochial schools rarely were the top kids.

I would note that top public schools work well for highly motivated kids. Prep schools work well for them but prep schools often do a far better job for bright kids who have motivational issues or learning disabilities. The kid who was last at my prep school was smart-his boards were around 1250 (back when 600 / 600 was a good score) and he ended up graduating summa cum laude from Vanderbilt.

He didn't get along with alot of our class and was withdrawn socially but when he got to a big university the tools he got from our prep school allowed him to do very well
 
So by actually reading the Census report on Income, we find out that the poor are not getting poorer, and that the middle class is moving up the income ladder. [1, page 41 Table A-1]

So we've established the fact that the rich aren't becoming richer at the expense of the poor or middle class. How are the rich becoming richer? Not because of tax law, but because of greater gains due to trade and globalization. Consider billionaire J.K. Rowling [2]:

Alex Tabarrok said:
Homer, Shakespeare and Tolkien all earned much less. Why? Consider Homer, he told great stories but he could earn no more in a night than say 50 people might pay for an evening's entertainment. Shakespeare did a little better. The Globe theater could hold 3000 and unlike Homer, Shakespeare didn't have to be at the theater to earn. Shakespeare's words were leveraged. ...
Rowling has the leverage of the book but also the movie, the video game, and the toy. And globalization, both economic and cultural, means that Rowling's words, images, and products are translated, transmitted and transported everywhere - this is the real magic of Ha-li Bo-te. ...
Rowling's success brings with it inequality. Time is limited and people want to read the same books that their friends are reading so book publishing has a winner-take all component. Thus, greater leverage brings greater inequality. The average writer's income hasn't gone up much in the past thirty years but today, for the first time ever, a handful of writers can be multi-millionaires and even billionaires. The top pulls away from the median.
Click to expand...

Google, Microsoft, Buffet, are other such examples. So yes, the rich are getting richer, perhaps even fantastically rich; but as a general rule no one else is poorer because of it.

J

[1] http://www.census.gov/prod/2010pubs/p60-238.pdf
[2] Marginal Revolution: Harry Potter and the Mystery of Inequality
 
Solidus;1059016696]So by actually reading the Census report on Income, we find out that the poor are not getting poorer, and that the middle class is moving up the income ladder. [1, page 41 Table A-1]

So we've established the fact that the rich aren't becoming richer at the expense of the poor or middle class. How are the rich becoming richer? Not because of tax law, but because of greater gains due to trade and globalization. Consider billionaire J.K. Rowling [2]:
Click to expand...

That's true.

"The poor" have never been as well off as they are today so saying the gap is widening doesn't really mean a great deal. Wealth isn't a finite amount.

It's probably more accurate to say that the jealousy factor between the richer and the poorer is rising.
 
Grant said:
That's true.

"The poor" have never been as well off as they are today so saying the gap is widening doesn't really mean a great deal. Wealth isn't a finite amount.

It's probably more accurate to say that the jealousy factor between the richer and the poorer is rising.
Click to expand...

the dems gain power playing that up
 
Objective Voice said:
OMG!!! That's EXACTLY what many of us have been saying!!! If the deficit is such a major concern for Conservatives, what sense does it make to give tax cuts to the wealthiest wage earners if doing so means we have to borrow that money to pay for them which, in turn, will only increase the national debt?
Click to expand...

The deficit and the debt are two different things. Let's not confuse the two.

But, by your logic, you also support doing away with the earned income credit, as well. Yes?

You just said, "If you don't have the money to spend, then don't borrow it so you can." Well, our government does not have $700 billion dollars to pay for the largest tax cuts to go to the smallest number of people. It just doesn't make good financial sense to give tax cuts to those who really don't need them. If the government doesn't borrow the money, they'll be forced to print it with no way to actually pay for it other than eventually increasing taxes or cutting alot of programs. I know the latter is what many Conservatives would rather have happen, but if any of you have been paying close attention to what's happening in many European countries right now, the U.S. is bound to face the exact same problems if Republicans regain control of Congress.
Click to expand...

Of course the largest tax cuts will go to the rich, because they're the ones that actually pay taxes.

If we are to turn our economic situation around, some tough decisions will have to be made in regards to government spending. This we all can agree on. But the bigger issue for the here and now is how best to spur economic growth. I think the President has this country moving in the right direction. By enacting legislation that provide small business loans through those financial institutions who can reach small businesses faster (small, local banks and credit unions), capital will begin to flow again to get our economic engine moving again. Providing tax cuts to the middle-class should give consumers some financial breathing room so that they (and by "they" I mean those of us who make up the middle-class) can buy goods and services, thus, spurring consumer demand. Once demand increases, productivity is bound to follow. As productivity increases, so should business revenue. Where revenue increases, businesses should have the working capital to add to their payrolls which means they'll be able to hire more.
Click to expand...

Businesses aren't borrowing money in this economy. It's idiotic to think that allowing them borrow money, easier is going to fix anything. Goes back to the, "if you don't have it to spend, then you don't borrow it so you can".

But, don't take my word for it. You'll see in a couple of years when the economy is still in the ****ter.

The wealthy don't need tax cuts, not for their personal income. They need it for the very businesses they create and manage. Therefore, it makes more sense to give those tax breaks (cuts) to small businesses themselves rather then focusing same towards the personal income of the rich. Let's face it, the truth is the wealthy won't use their pre-tax dollars to invest in small business ventures. They'll place their pre-tax dollar in tax shelters (i.e., 401K, ETF, mutual funds, etc.) to increase their networth. Granted, these investments do help major corporations generate revenues (i.e., sell of stocks, bonds, T-Bills, etc.) and that's what many people think of when the discussion of tax cuts to the wealthy comes about, but these such investments commonly don't benefit the typical "small business", i.e., the day care center, lawn care service, barbar shop, auto mechanic, small bouteque, the hair salon, the small independent book seller, the TV/copier repair service, the small restuarant owner, the corner coffee shop (that's not Starbucks), your cleaner or tailor, etc., etc...the vast number of small businesses that do the majority of the hiring across the country. These are the businesses who need the economic help the most because they hire more people from within their communities!
Click to expand...

Too bad that ain't gonna happen. Small businesses aren't receiving tax cuts.


So, if you (Republicans) really want to help move this nation's economy forward either get behind legislation that will help move this country forward or get the hell outta the way!
Click to expand...

More taxes will move the country forward? How do you figure that? I can't wait to hear this.
 
Last edited:
UtahBill said:
I will pay whatever taxes the govt asks of me, always have. Think of it as dues paid for the priviledge of living in such a nice country, with real opportunities for anyone willing to do their share of the work on the road to success.
Stop your incessant whining, and just pay your taxes.
Click to expand...

That almost sounds like something that Karl Maex would say. Nevermind all that crapola about, "inalienable rights". All that bull**** about, "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness", don't mean anything. We have to pay for the privilege.

Well, some folks aren't paying their fair share and you don't seem to mind at all.
 
Solidus said:
So by actually reading the Census report on Income, we find out that the poor are not getting poorer, and that the middle class is moving up the income ladder. [1, page 41 Table A-1]

So we've established the fact that the rich aren't becoming richer at the expense of the poor or middle class. How are the rich becoming richer? Not because of tax law, but because of greater gains due to trade and globalization. Consider billionaire J.K. Rowling [2]:



Google, Microsoft, Buffet, are other such examples. So yes, the rich are getting richer, perhaps even fantastically rich; but as a general rule no one else is poorer because of it.

J

[1] http://www.census.gov/prod/2010pubs/p60-238.pdf
[2] Marginal Revolution: Harry Potter and the Mystery of Inequality
Click to expand...
I think the census said the median income of the middle class and poor was not significantly different in 2009 than it was in 2008 but it had gone down in some income brackets by a percentage point or two. But then the median income over the last ten years hasn't signifigantly changed either, which suggests the poor and middle class are stagnating.

So if the income of the poor and middle class is stagnating while the rich are getting richer, doesn't that suggest there is a widening gap between the rich and poor? And if 96% of the wealth in this country is concentrated at the top 1% of the population, then doesn't that also suggest a widening gap between the rich and poor? With such an unequal distribution of wealth even the most laisse fair economist has called it a cause for concern for the stability and security of the country.
 
Grant said:
The rich will continue to get richer because they send their children to private schools while the poor have their children going to public schools, where loyalty to the Unions comes before loyalty to the children's education.
Click to expand...

I went to a rural public school and did quite alright for myself education-wise.

That being said, my kids will be going to Stuyvesant, Bronx Science, or private school.
 
Grant said:
The rich will continue to get richer because they send their children to private schools while the poor have their children going to public schools, where loyalty to the Unions comes before loyalty to the children's education.
Click to expand...

The rich will keep getting richer because they keep doing the things that make them rich.
The poor will continue to get poorer because, well, they keep doing the things that make them poor.
 
RightinNYC said:
I went to a rural public school and did quite alright for myself education-wise.

That being said, my kids will be going to Stuyvesant, Bronx Science, or private school.
Click to expand...

I have two sons one went to public schools and one went to church schools.The oldest son (church school) went on and got his degree and was quite successful until he had a stroke.

Youngest son, with his public school education is also quite successful but he took a different path. He worked for other companies, one being (Boeing) before deciding that he didn’t like that route, so he started his own tool and die shop.

Was doing quite well up until the last two years, had to lay off a few good workers but he has landed a pretty good subcontract (Boeing :roll:) so should be able to call them back pretty soon.

Of course the ole man got him some pretty good deals on CNC machines that were up for auction from companies that went bankrupt the last couple of years. He got a pretty good deal on the shipping cost to drag them into the shop as well. ;)
 
donc said:
I have two sons one went to public schools and one went to church schools.The oldest son (church school) went on and got his degree and was quite successful until he had a stroke.

Youngest son, with his public school education is also quite successful but he took a different path. He worked for other companies, one being (Boeing) before deciding that he didn’t like that route, so he started his own tool and die shop.

Was doing quite well up until the last two years, had to lay off a few good workers but he has landed a pretty good subcontract (Boeing :roll:) so should be able to call them back pretty soon.

Of course the ole man got him some pretty good deals on CNC machines that were up for auction from companies that went bankrupt the last couple of years. He got a pretty good deal on the shipping cost to drag them into the shop as well. ;)
Click to expand...

Sorry to hear about your son, DonC. I hope he is well.
 
apdst said:
That almost sounds like something that Karl Maex would say. Nevermind all that crapola about, "inalienable rights". All that bull**** about, "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness", don't mean anything. We have to pay for the privilege.

Well, some folks aren't paying their fair share and you don't seem to mind at all.
Click to expand...
Finally, you are at least half right...some folks aren't paying their fair share, the RICH are getting away with robbery. They are stealing from the country that gave them the opportunity to get rich...
The part you got wrong, I do mind, a lot. And as usual, you label me as something I am not....just because I am willing to support the country that took me in to the Navy, and trained me, and gave me the skills to be employed in civilian life, I am somehow a marxist. Where did you get your skills? I hear working on an oil rig usually requires more brawn than brain, depending on what you do...
 
why did the party punt?

Echo Chamber: Punting Congress - Alexander Trowbridge - POLITICO.com

taxing the rich is central to narrowing the gap the census uncovered between the well off and those with only two flat screen tv's, leadership has patiently explained

right and wrong are one thing, and it's important that we teach our children

but for us grownups, reality trumps homilies

Olympia Snowe firm on extending tax cuts - Glenn Thrush - POLITICO.com

and omnipresent olympia symbolizes ROADBLOCK

CHECKMATE

the FORTY SEVEN centrists on pelosi's temporary carpet demonstrate a similar landscape prevails downstairs

whatcha gonna do, nance?

tax cuts for EVERYONE?

or NO ONE?

your move (tick tock tick...)
 
TurtleDude said:
as I noted in another post the longer a "game" takes place the more a skilled player will win. Its like poker, those with skill or luck will continue to make money against those who have neither skill nor luck. Those who have both a great amount of skill and luck will almost always win and the longer the game goes, the more they win.

so it is to be expected that the rich get richer as the years go by. So tell me Ender, what is your solution?
Click to expand...

Currently the us government only has a few sources of income. Individual income tax, Payroll tax, corporate tax and about 7%from excise and other small stuff. Without creating another source of income that’s what we have to work with. Any other income source would create a larger government and who wants that.

The federal government brings in about 2.5 trillion a year. As much as everyone hates to pay taxes its a good way to collect income. Its broken but can be fixed. Here are a few ideas. $345 billion go uncollected so lets go after those first. Next lets take away most of the tax exemptions. Leave home interest, kids and current tax shelters. Others like a tax exemption for pineapple farmers in Hawai can go. That should be another 10% to 15%.

Next is trade. This may actually be more important than anything. We must get better at how we deal with our international trade. To allow countries to unfairly trade with us has lost us not only jobs but entire industries. Force China to stop fixing their Currency and the next day we have 1.9 million jobs. More jobs = more income.

Those are a few ideas. Since we spend more than we make we either have to add to the debt of over 11 trillion or raise taxes. Unfortunately I don't see a way to avoid a little of both until we that can control spending. We cant do that until the people in office get there without being paid for by business and special interest. That's both republican and democrat.

I'm not a catastrophist but am concerned about some possible economic ssues.

* About 60% of our health care goes to geriatrics. As the baby boomers move into this group we will have to make some very difficult decisions. Expect geriatric healthcare to increase by double in about 10 years.

* Big business like GM, Exxon and Monsanto ect. have been allowed to destroy many industries and need to be regulated by a government agency NOT run by their ex employees.

* When the banks cried wolf and were handed a trillion dollars only to turn around and post huge profits the next quarter it angered congress. We already have seen several new regulations and should expect more unless the new congress has short term memory. e.g. interchange fees reduced, overdraw fees eliminated, on January 1 the new risk based lending letters ect ect.
This will have an effect on the banking industry for years and will cause about 3000 small and medium banks to go away.

I can go on but dont want to babble
 
UtahBill said:
Finally, you are at least half right...some folks aren't paying their fair share, the RICH are getting away with robbery. They are stealing from the country that gave them the opportunity to get rich...
The part you got wrong, I do mind, a lot. And as usual, you label me as something I am not....just because I am willing to support the country that took me in to the Navy, and trained me, and gave me the skills to be employed in civilian life, I am somehow a marxist. Where did you get your skills? I hear working on an oil rig usually requires more brawn than brain, depending on what you do...
Click to expand...

this oozes Bull poop. The rich (however you describe them) pay far far more than they use and contrary to the steaming pile of dung that is thrown around here, most of the rich got that way not by stealing stuff, not by ripping off people, but by doing the right things and making themselves valuable and thus having stock in trade
 
ender1 said:
Currently the us government only has a few sources of income. Individual income tax, Payroll tax, corporate tax and about 7%from excise and other small stuff. Without creating another source of income that’s what we have to work with. Any other income source would create a larger government and who wants that.

The federal government brings in about 2.5 trillion a year. As much as everyone hates to pay taxes its a good way to collect income. Its broken but can be fixed. Here are a few ideas. $345 billion go uncollected so lets go after those first. Next lets take away most of the tax exemptions. Leave home interest, kids and current tax shelters. Others like a tax exemption for pineapple farmers in Hawai can go. That should be another 10% to 15%.

Next is trade. This may actually be more important than anything. We must get better at how we deal with our international trade. To allow countries to unfairly trade with us has lost us not only jobs but entire industries. Force China to stop fixing their Currency and the next day we have 1.9 million jobs. More jobs = more income.

Those are a few ideas. Since we spend more than we make we either have to add to the debt of over 11 trillion or raise taxes. Unfortunately I don't see a way to avoid a little of both until we that can control spending. We cant do that until the people in office get there without being paid for by business and special interest. That's both republican and democrat.

I'm not a catastrophist but am concerned about some possible economic ssues.

* About 60% of our health care goes to geriatrics. As the baby boomers move into this group we will have to make some very difficult decisions. Expect geriatric healthcare to increase by double in about 10 years.

* Big business like GM, Exxon and Monsanto ect. have been allowed to destroy many industries and need to be regulated by a government agency NOT run by their ex employees.

* When the banks cried wolf and were handed a trillion dollars only to turn around and post huge profits the next quarter it angered congress. We already have seen several new regulations and should expect more unless the new congress has short term memory. e.g. interchange fees reduced, overdraw fees eliminated, on January 1 the new risk based lending letters ect ect.
This will have an effect on the banking industry for years and will cause about 3000 small and medium banks to go away.

I can go on but dont want to babble
Click to expand...

Interesting libertarian thought-wanting more government regulation

interesting indeed
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom