• 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

gao, govt accountability office, congressional audit of authority, yesterday, march 1: a full HALF TRILLION dollars of WASTE and DUPLICATION of bureaucratic arrogance, largesse, incompetence, corruption...

All told, the GAO targeted as much as $510 billion on 583 potentially duplicative, wasteful programs overseen by roughly 182 government agencies and offices, stretching across the federal government, from the Department of Defense to Transportation to Health & Human Services. The GAO found that some of the duplication dates back to 2002, but most came in fiscal years 2009 to 2010 and going forward.

The GAO found as much as $200 billion in duplicative spending going out the door over the next decade on 2,100 data centers alone. Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) requested the report, and has said “it makes us all look like jackasses.”

The GAO’s list dovetails with work already done on this waste by the Congressional Budget Office (see below).

For instance, the U.S. has 15 different agencies overseeing food-safety laws, 25 separate programs on health information systems, and 80 programs for economic development. The GAO says there are potentially 35 duplicative programs on infrastructure. And it questions the $58 billion spent annually on 100 surface transportation projects. Health and transportation programs matter greatly here, since the fear is health reform may add to this duplication, and the White House has spent hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars on stimulus funds for transportation projects to create jobs.

The sought after cap and trade system which would set up a carbon credit marketplace to cut global warming would cost up to $200 billion a year, the US Treasury says, or $1,800 per American household.

The GAO says just five of 47 job training and employment programs had been evaluated for efficiencies. “Little is known about the effectiveness of most programs,” the GAO said in its report. The government also spent $62.5 billion on 18 food assistance programs, but “little is known about the effectiveness of [11 of the 18 programs] because they have not been well studied,” the GAO said.
Click to expand...

that's g-a-o, gentlepeople

a HALF A TRILLION---pfft

reported YESTERDAY, march 1

and you want to give these grafters MORE?

no wonder you got so hellaciously shellacked on tsunami tuesday

Gov't Watchdog IDs Billions In Federal Waste - Politics News Story - WSMV Nashville

GAO Finds Massive Waste, Duplication - FoxBusiness.com

and don't forget what we're facing, folks---a housing market which popped and brought us here and is still no basement in sight, the states are facing TWO POINT FIVE TRILLION of unfunded public pensions, the states are straining with another QUARTER TRIL via medicaid's expansion, unfunded liabilities in medicare and social security approach the combined gdp of the entire planet, service on the debt---mere INTEREST ALONE---will approach a full ONE TRILLION DOLLARS a year by just after mid decade (according to the nyt), fannie and fred could cost another HALF T...

debate, anyone?
 
The Prof said:
gao, govt accountability office, congressional audit of authority, yesterday, march 1: a full HALF TRILLION dollars of WASTE and DUPLICATION of bureaucratic arrogance, largesse, incompetence, corruption...



that's g-a-o, gentlepeople

a HALF A TRILLION---pfft

reported YESTERDAY, march 1

and you want to give these grafters MORE?

no wonder you got so hellaciously shellacked on tsunami tuesday

Gov't Watchdog IDs Billions In Federal Waste - Politics News Story - WSMV Nashville

GAO Finds Massive Waste, Duplication - FoxBusiness.com

and don't forget what we're facing, folks---a housing market which popped and brought us here and is still no basement in sight, the states are facing TWO POINT FIVE TRILLION of unfunded public pensions, the states are straining with another QUARTER TRIL via medicaid's expansion, unfunded liabilities in medicare and social security approach the combined gdp of the entire planet, service on the debt---mere INTEREST ALONE---will approach a full ONE TRILLION DOLLARS a year by just after mid decade (according to the nyt), fannie and fred could cost another HALF T...

debate, anyone?
Click to expand...

I have seen no one argue here for not cutting government waste from ALL of its departments and programs, including the military, as your article goes on to say:

"Also at the Pentagon, the Army and the Marine Corps have developed separate "mine rollers" with the Marine Corps version costing $85,000 a unit while the Army's units cost $77,000 to $225,000, but there's disagreement over which version works better.
Some of the biggest savings could be achieved by consolidating the government's computer data centers, which have multiplied from 432 to more than 2,100 in little more than a decade. Some computer servers have utilization rates of just 5 percent. A private sector study estimates that consolidating data centers could save the government as much as $200 billion over 10 years.

It's unclear how many of the report's recommendations will be put in place. Lawmakers and committees often defend programs within their jurisdictional fiefdoms, as do federal agencies. Disagreement typically produces gridlock, but the pressure to cut spending will test the ability of lawmakers and agencies to defend wasteful practices."


You get no argument from me that we need to cut wasteful spending everywhere. But this does nothing to address the widening gap between the rich and the poor. That has more to do with education and exchanging a living wage to full time workers so we stop shoving more and more of the middle class below the poverty line, thereby increasing the welfare rolls and to go back to the progressive tax system that properly taxed the top 1% of the country.
 
Catawba said:
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?
Click to expand...

The 'super rich" are not moving the middle class anywhere near the poverty line. That suggests you believe that wealth is finite and cannot be created, and that's not altogether surprising.

It is the American people having to give almost half their money to the government each year that is creating poverty. Naturally, as a result, many will have their incomes lowered.

Now, inexplicably, the economically illiterate want more personal income sent to Washington without having any idea how the money will be spent or whether it will do any good.

This hopelessly inadequate knowledge of basic economic is inexcusable and further evidence of how the teachers unions have been turning out a poor product over the years. Now the entire country must pay for the folly of this disastrous educational system.
 
Grant said:
The 'super rich" are not moving the middle class anywhere near the poverty line. That suggests you believe that wealth is finite and cannot be created, and that's not altogether surprising.

It is the American people having to give almost half their money to the government each year that is creating poverty. Naturally, as a result, many will have their incomes lowered.

Now, inexplicably, the economically illiterate want more personal income sent to Washington without having any idea how the money will be spent or whether it will do any good.

This hopelessly inadequate knowledge of basic economic is inexcusable and further evidence of how the teachers unions have been turning out a poor product over the years. Now the entire country must pay for the folly of this disastrous educational system.
Click to expand...


If what you say were true than we would all be suffering equally. But that is not the case. Those at the very top are still increasing wealth while more of the middle class slips into poverty. Do you realize that one in seven Americans are now officially poor?

"In census figures due out this week, the poverty rate is expected to jump from 13.2 percent in 2008 to almost 15 percent in 2009. That means one in seven Americans is now officially poor/"
More American Families Slip into Poverty - CBS Evening News - CBS News
 
TurtleDude said:
remind me how much money Goldman sux gave Obama in 2008?
Click to expand...

That's the best you got? A rather feeble attempt to discredit Goldman Sachs as some type of liberal think tank. Sorry, but GS has a very high (dare I say personal interest as everyone at Goldman Sachs is paid substantially on success) vested interest in a strong economy. When it comes to economic impact, their only loyalty is going to be their pockets.

It must be fun to live in the republican fantasy world where you discredit everything you don't believe in as created by liberal main stream media, the liberal CBO, the liberal investment banking community.... perhaps the truth just has a left-wing bias.
 
Catawba said:
If what you say were true than we would all be suffering equally. But that is not the case. Those at the very top are still increasing wealth while more of the middle class slips into poverty. Do you realize that one in seven Americans are now officially poor?
Click to expand...

When people are forced to send 50% of what they make to the government there is going to be less money in the hands of the people. That should be evident. Please keep in mind that income taxes are not the only source of government revenue. The poor pay just as much on taxes for a gallon of gas, among many thousands of other items, as the rich. With higher taxes they will naturally suffer disproportionately.
"In census figures due out this week, the poverty rate is expected to jump from 13.2 percent in 2008 to almost 15 percent in 2009. That means one in seven Americans is now officially poor/"
More American Families Slip into Poverty - CBS Evening News - CBS News
Click to expand...

I'm not surprised. We can look at Communist countries where there was virtually no middle class, just the poor and the political class, because the government had absolute control. That same sort of system is apparently, though unwittingly, being sought by some in the United States.
 
Grant said:
When people are forced to send 50% of what they make to the government there is going to be less money in the hands of the people. That should be evident. Please keep in mind that income taxes are not the only source of government revenue. The poor pay just as much on taxes for a gallon of gas, among many thousands of other items, as the rich. With higher taxes they will naturally suffer disproportionately.
Click to expand...

That's one of the things I am talking about, the middle class are forced to send 50% of what they make to the government, while the top 1% pay much less and in some cases nothing. The other 50% the middle class spends on necessities with little left over to buy consumer goods. The top one percent have no such hardship.

I'm not surprised. We can look at Communist countries where there was virtually no middle class, just the poor and the political class, because the government had absolute control. That same sort of system is apparently, though unwittingly, being sought by some in the United States
Click to expand...

No it is those that support a fascist state that has taken us on the dangerous path we are on. One of the first things to be done to pave the way for a fascist state is to get rid of the unions.

But that would probably never happen, right?
 
Last edited:
I'm not surprised. We can look at Communist countries where there was virtually no middle class, just the poor and the political class, because the government had absolute control. That same sort of system is apparently, though unwittingly, being sought by some in the United States.
Click to expand...

By no one. The above is hysteria.
 
a fascist state---LOL!
 
Catawba said:
That's one of the things I am talking about, the middle class are forced to send 50% of what they make to the government, while the top 1% pay much less and in some cases nothing. The other 50% the middle class spends on necessities with little left over to buy consumer goods. The top one percent have no such hardship.
Click to expand...

So what's the answer?Clearly government spending has to be brought under control because it's evident the government will just waste the money no matter how much the public sends them, and will go further in debt by borrowing more money besides. They can never get enough money. If the rich were to send them all their money, every penny, that would still not be enough to pay of the debts, and the programs that are throwing the money into the bottomless sinkhole would still be in place. But then you would have every American broke, including those who have tended to create the wealth. But before that happens, of course, the people who have the money will leave, and there are signs they are doing that now.


No it is those that support a fascist state that has taken us on the dangerous path we are on. One of the first things to be done to pave the way for a fascist state is to get rid of the unions.
Click to expand...

You really shouldn't throw these terms around unless you understand them. Tennessee is not a 'Fascist State", nor is South Carolina. In fact these are states where the population are growing. Union thugs trying to take over the economy are more fitting for the "fascist" term.

But that would probably never happen, right
Click to expand...

There certainly seems to be some who have fascist tendencies, such as dividing society into different factions and turning on one segment against the other (the 'the rich' and 'the poor' would be one example) without looking at the genuine source of the problems. That would be an economies being ruined by out of control governments. Governments have always caused more problems than the people they were ostensibly intended to serve.
Click to expand...
 
SE102 said:
By no one. The above is hysteria.
Click to expand...

I have money, don't live in the States, so am hardly hysterical. I was using an example of how a powerful government, intent on controling state wealth can cause the shrinking of the middle class to nothing. We see that trending now, and it will continue until government is once again broight under some control.

I didn;t think the analogy would be that difficult to grasp.
 
Catawba said:
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?
Click to expand...

another stupid strawman argument. I would be happy to compare my thought process with yours any day conerning this subject. YOu also blatantly misrepresent what my position is and which party supports the uber rich
 
The Prof said:
a fascist state---LOL!
Click to expand...

some on the left are still hysterical over the November results and are reduced to mindless psychobabbling
 
TurtleDude said:
another stupid strawman argument. I would be happy to compare my thought process with yours any day conerning this subject. YOu also blatantly misrepresent what my position is and which party supports the uber rich
Click to expand...

What makes you believe that the party that opposes the party that focuses on tax breaks for the wealthiest of Americans as well as lessening oversight and relaxing regulations allowing for more profit at a cost to the consumer is the one that supports the uber rich?
 
Grant said:
I didn't think the analogy would be that difficult to grasp.
Click to expand...

Possibly if I subscribed to popular political illusions I would understand it, but to me it sounds retardulous.
 
Catawba said:
That's one of the things I am talking about, the middle class are forced to send 50% of what they make to the government, while the top 1% pay much less and in some cases nothing. The other 50% the middle class spends on necessities with little left over to buy consumer goods. The top one percent have no such hardship.



No it is those that support a fascist state that has taken us on the dangerous path we are on. One of the first things to be done to pave the way for a fascist state is to get rid of the unions.

But that would probably never happen, right?
Click to expand...

Give us some idea of exactly who you are talking about when you say, "middle class", please.
 
Boo Radley said:
No, that kind of data can't tell us why. That requires a subjective analysis of the data. Nor does it tell us if it is any different today than it was in the past. People in lower income and improverished areas have always been found wanting in one way or another, conplete with studies.
Click to expand...

They want, but apparently they don't want to work.

No, it is data plus opinion. Data doesn't speak for itself, someone has to interpret it, and that leads us in subjective analysis.
Click to expand...

You're not saying anything about the facts!

"Peter Doeringer's study of the Boston "ghetto" labor market in 1968 found that about 70% of job applicants referred by neighborhood employment centers received job offers — but that over half of these offers were rejected, and of those accepted only about 40% of the new workers kept their jobs for as long as one month."

There is nothing to dispute there! Unemployment is at least somewhat due to a poor work ethic. You're just in denial.
 
Grant said:
So what's the answer?Clearly government spending has to be brought under control because it's evident the government will just waste the money no matter how much the public sends them, and will go further in debt by borrowing more money besides. They can never get enough money. If the rich were to send them all their money, every penny, that would still not be enough to pay of the debts, and the programs that are throwing the money into the bottomless sinkhole would still be in place. But then you would have every American broke, including those who have tended to create the wealth. But before that happens, of course, the people who have the money will leave, and there are signs they are doing that now.
Click to expand...

I would say the first place to start would be on the waste identified by the GAO, then we need to examine how our social programs can be modified to make them more sustainable, then lock those funds from being used to offset other government costs, reduce the size and spending of our military, then equitably set the tax rates to provide the income necessary to pay our bills. with enough left over to begin paying down our debt.

You really shouldn't throw these terms around unless you understand them. Tennessee is not a 'Fascist State", nor is South Carolina. In fact these are states where the population are growing. Union thugs trying to take over the economy are more fitting for the "fascist" term.
Click to expand...

You mean I should throw the word fascist around like the way people throw the word communism around?

There certainly seems to be some who have fascist tendencies, such as dividing society into different factions and turning on one segment against the other (the 'the rich' and 'the poor' would be one example) without looking at the genuine source of the problems
Click to expand...

Agreed. As Warren Buffett noted, "There’s class warfare, all right, but it’s my class, the rich class, that’s making war, and we’re winning."

That would be an economies being ruined by out of control governments. Governments have always caused more problems than the people they were ostensibly intended to serve.
Click to expand...

Governments are the problem? Not the people we elect to run it? So your plan is to have no government?
Click to expand...
 
Catawba said:
Relative Inequality Is The Source Of All Of Society’s Ills | china/divide
Click to expand...

That's complete bull****. Their middle class is growing so much you can google all day and never get to the end of discussion of the booming growth. It's on every radio, every station, every TV at some point or another. How are you peddling this nonsnese? It's like you're a flat-earther or something, christ.

Creating a more capitalist market and opening open foreign investment (capitalist investment) has done the exact ****ing opposite of the crap you are spewing.
The fact is ENORMOUS numbers of people are being lifted out of poverty into middle and upper class. Historically unprescedented numbers.
The fact is that some who remain poor, remain poor. <- DUR

Concept:Rise of China's Middle Class
The meteoric rise in China’s middle class is tied to dramatic increases in its per capita income, which is growing at a nearly unprecedented rate. The first industrial revolution created a 250% increase in per capita income over a 100 year period. The second industrial revolution triggered 350% per capita income growth over 60 years. By comparison, China is on track to create a 700% growth in per capita income in just 20 years.

Burgeoning middle class reshapes China's skyline - People's Daily Online
Meanwhile, the accelerated growth of China's middle class also manifests the country is already on the sound track of development, with more and more citizens getting close to or fulfilling their 'Chinese Dream,' or so to speak, the dream of a bulging purse plus a satisfying life.

Rise of the Global Middle Class - Issue 014 - GOOD
As for the new middle class's relative size, think bread truck, not breadbasket: Over the next couple of decades, the percent of the world's population that can be considered middle class, judging by purchasing power, will almost double, from just over a quarter of the population to more like half. The bulk of this increase will occur in China and India
 
phattonez said:
They want, but apparently they don't want to work.
Click to expand...

No, that's a subjective conclusion and not an objective fact.


You're not saying anything about the facts!

"Peter Doeringer's study of the Boston "ghetto" labor market in 1968 found that about 70% of job applicants referred by neighborhood employment centers received job offers — but that over half of these offers were rejected, and of those accepted only about 40% of the new workers kept their jobs for as long as one month."

There is nothing to dispute there! Unemployment is at least somewhat due to a poor work ethic. You're just in denial.
Click to expand...

I am saying something about the facts. What happened doesn't tell us why it happened. You make a leap that may not be the case. Not only that, but we have no like data to compare with past generations. we don't even know if it is really much different, let alone all the factors involved.
 
apdst said:
Give us some idea of exactly who you are talking about when you say, "middle class", please.
Click to expand...

The median income in the US ranges from $30k for those with some HS to those with a Doctorate degree at $90k, but I have no problem using the $200k cut off for middle class currently being used.
 
Boo Radley said:
No, that's a subjective conclusion and not an objective fact.
Click to expand...

Then let's say that they are not working even when the opportunity is provided to them.

I am saying something about the facts. What happened doesn't tell us why it happened. You make a leap that may not be the case. Not only that, but we have no like data to compare with past generations. we don't even know if it is really much different, let alone all the factors involved.
Click to expand...

Then I would ask you to come forward with your own data in response. You've had plenty of opportunities but all you've given is your opinions. That and $5 won't even get me a cup of coffee.
 
Catawba said:
The median income in the US ranges from $30k for those with some HS to those with a Doctorate degree at $90k, but I have no problem using the $200k cut off for middle class currently being used.
Click to expand...

Why not look at the way income has been changing for the 75th quartile and 25th quartile of the nation? Because that group, which is the best definition of the middle class, has seen tremendous growth. Not that the data really mean anything anyway, other than that as a whole our nation is becoming richer, not that some mythical middle class is growing.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom