• 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!

Rich-Poor gap widening

Boo Radley said:
Data doesn't speak for itself, someone has to interpret it, and that leads us in subjective analysis.
Click to expand...

exactly

and that's why we all turn to JON STEWART!

LOL!

COMEDY CENTRAL, baby!
 
justabubba said:
you prove it with almost every post you make
Click to expand...

I agree-i do tend to demonstrate which posts are rather stupid I am glad that I can englighten those who did not benefit from attending one of the best prep schools in the nation and then two of the finest universities in the world.
 
Troubadour said:
Right, it's totally baseless to say that a Party which does everything to make the rich richer and the poor poorer wants rich people to be richer and poor people to be poorer. How could I possibly have thought that?
Click to expand...

if you understand that the uber rich tend to be dems its easy to understand why welfare socialism actually helps the ultra rich and that is why people like Buffett, Gates Soros, and ted turner like the current tax system

I will explain it to you later tonight
 
phattonez said:
Actually I didn't claim that.
Click to expand...

It's been awhile so I went back See post 132. I respond to Erod who says:

Erod said:
The gap is widening because a significant percentage of people in this country have no work ethic whatsoever, and no money-management plan beyond buying flat screens and XBoxes with every nickel they get their hands on.

1/3 of this country is beyond stupid, lazy, and irresponsible. They bring the averages down across the board.
Click to expand...

I said:

Boo said:
I think that is BS. It makes those who believe it feel better, seeing themselves in the upper 1/3. But most people have a fine work ethic. Of all our problems related to this gap, this is by far the least.
Click to expand...

You respond in post 138 with:

Actually it is a problem.
Click to expand...

Not sure I have your claim wrong. Not by much anyway.
 
Troubadour said:
Right, it's totally baseless to say that a Party which does everything to make the rich richer and the poor poorer wants rich people to be richer and poor people to be poorer. How could I possibly have thought that?
Click to expand...

I'm making a helluva lot less money since the Dems started running the show. You can't kill jobs, raise payroll taxes and claim to be a working man's hero.
 
Yes, welfare does keep the poor poor.
 
"Much is regularly said about the ever-widening gap between the rich and poor, the haves and have-nots. Such a topic is reg u larly heard in likely places such as cap i tal ist Amer ica, where the rich seem ingly get richer, the poor poorer, and its once vaunted middle-class might be get ting smaller. Even in “com mu nist” China, the eco nomic reforms of the past few decades have changed mod ern China from a nation where every one was more or less equally butt-ass poor to a nation where there are stag ger*ing dif fer ences of wealth between the urban and rural, gov ern ment offi cials and laobaix ing (the com mon ers), Shaanxi coal mine bosses and their dis pos able min ers. Yes, sev eral hun*dred mil lion pre vi ously butt-ass poor Chi nese have been lifted out of poverty (as defined by the UN), but China’s gov ern ment lead ers cer*tainly rec og nize how the grow ing income gap may threaten Chi nese social stability."
Relative Inequality Is The Source Of All Of Society’s Ills | china/divide

Is creating income inequality how we are to compete with China's wages for its working class? I am hoping someone can explain to me, why in a country where the middle class has a clear majority over the super rich upper class, that is not yet ruled by a dictatorship, that some continue to vote for those who do not represent the middle class interest?

It is way past time to eliminate the tax breaks and loopholes for the super rich, if our middle class is to recover.
 
Last edited:
Catawba said:
I am hoping someone can explain to me, why in a country where the middle class has a clear majority over the super rich upper class, that is not yet ruled by a dictatorship, that some continue to vote for those who do not represent the middle class interest?
Click to expand...

i guess most americans just don't think the way you do

it's kinda odd you'd have to ask
 
The Prof said:
i guess most americans just don't think the way you do

it's kinda odd you'd have to ask
Click to expand...

Why do you for example vote against your own interest? Unless of course you are one of the super-rich, in which case you are voting your interest.
 
Catawba said:
It is way past time to eliminate the tax breaks and loopholes for the super rich, if our middle class is to recover.
Click to expand...

You've hit the nail on the head. The right-wingers who support class warfare against the poor and tax breaks for the rich are undermining the very success of the country.

Radical income inequality like this is the natural consequence of a corrupt system, and a broken, unfree market.
 
Catawba said:
Why do you for example vote against your own interest? Unless of course you are one of the super-rich, in which case you are voting your interest.
Click to expand...

the super rich have the same interests you do--they want to keep lots of americans miired in the manure of welfare socialism
 
Guy Incognito said:
You've hit the nail on the head. The right-wingers who support class warfare against the poor and tax breaks for the rich are undermining the very success of the country.

Radical income inequality like this is the natural consequence of a corrupt system, and a broken, unfree market.
Click to expand...

more mindless mutterings from Guy Just what would you do to make the unproductive and uncompetitive more valuable to the marketplace?
 
upsideguy said:
Yep. If the Republicans would stand down from this job killing obsession to cut government expenditures during a period of high employment, we would be in much better shape. I'm glad we can agree on something, Apdst.

Goldman Sachs: House Spending Cuts Will Hurt Economic Growth - The Note
Click to expand...

According to Goldman Sachs, the $61B of expense cuts proposed by the Republicans will cause a 2% slowing of GDP. If the 2% slowing in GDP corresponds to a 2% reduction in tax receipts and the tax receipt base is $2.5T, than the $61B in expense cuts will translate to a $50B tax revenue shortfall, for a net gain of $11B. This discounts any multiplier effect of government expenditures (the idea that the dollar spent pays the payroll costs of the government contractor, an employee of which buys a service in his community paying the payroll cost of another work, who in turn buys....and so on.... each having income, each paying taxes... all off the same dollar as it circulates through an economy)....

So, the benefit of cutting expenditures by $61B is only $11B; the cost of that is extreme pain (more layoffs and unemployment).

Why did we let the Republicans back in again? They have zero sense of economics and historically have done nothing but run up huge deficits.
 

Attachments

  • debt2.gif
    debt2.gif
    15.6 KB · Views: 26
upsideguy said:
According to Goldman Sachs, the $61B of expense cuts proposed by the Republicans will cause a 2% slowing of GDP. If the 2% slowing in GDP corresponds to a 2% reduction in tax receipts and the tax receipt base is $2.5T, than the $61B in expense cuts will translate to a $50B tax revenue shortfall, for a net gain of $11B. This discounts any multiplier effect of government expenditures (the idea that the dollar spent pays the payroll costs of the government contractor, an employee of which buys a service in his community paying the payroll cost of another work, who in turn buys....and so on.... each having income, each paying taxes... all off the same dollar as it circulates through an economy)....

So, the benefit of cutting expenditures by $61B is only $11B; the cost of that is extreme pain (more layoffs and unemployment).

Why did we let the Republicans back in again? They have zero sense of economics and historically have done nothing but run up huge deficits.
Click to expand...

remind me how much money Goldman sux gave Obama in 2008?
 
upsideguy said:
Why did we let the Republicans back in again?
Click to expand...

It was essentially a racist backlash against Obama. There is a huge segment of our society that hates Muslims and Latinos and just about anything non-white; that's why they need all those guns, you know. To protect themselves from brown people.

And they **** themselves when a man who embodied the foreignness they find so frightening was elected president.
 
Guy Incognito said:
It was essentially a racist backlash against Obama. There is a huge segment of our society that hates Muslims and Latinos and just about anything non-white; that's why they need all those guns, you know. To protect themselves from brown people.

And they **** themselves when a man who embodied the foreignness they find so frightening was elected president.
Click to expand...

the hits just keep on coming

screaming racism because some of us don't like your master sham wow
 
TurtleDude said:
the super rich have the same interests you do--they want to keep lots of americans miired in the manure of welfare socialism
Click to expand...

So naturally you support the party representing the super rich, shoving more of the middle class under the poverty line so more welfare is needed and they have less money to be a consumer. You really haven't thought this through, have you?
 
TurtleDude said:
more mindless mutterings from Guy Just what would you do to make the unproductive and uncompetitive more valuable to the marketplace?
Click to expand...


You could start by increased priority for education for all in this country and exchanging a living wage for full time work.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom