Results 1 to 10 of 10
Like Tree2Likes
  • 1 Post By stevil
  • 1 Post By pdog

Thread: Reaganomics and income inequality

  1. #1
    Professor

    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Planet Earth
    Last Seen
    11-21-14 @ 07:05 PM
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    1,281
    Likes Received
    535 times
    Likes Given
    28

    Reaganomics and income inequality

    There's more evidence of a widening wealth inequality gap in America thanks to 30-plus years of Reaganomics. According to The Atlantic magazine - two-thirds of all new income in America between 2002 and 2007 went to just the top 1% of Americans. That's 2 out of every 3 dollars in America being sucked up by the richest of the rich.
    Not to mention - that the wealthiest 400 Americans - our nation's most senior oligarchs, who own more wealth than the bottom 150 million Americans - have seen their incomes double over the last twelve years while their tax rates have been cut in half. Talk about a "for the rich, by the rich" economy. Wealth inequality in America is at levels not seen since the 1920's - and we're now a more unequal nation than the Ivory Coast, Pakistan, Ethiopia, and Kazakhstan according to data from the CIA Factbook.

    So when the entire American middle class disappears, then can we all accept that Reagan's vision of America - and the direction that the current Republican Party has this nation headed - will lead us all toward ruin?

  2. #2
    Si vis pacem, para bellum
    Μολὼν λαβέ's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:20 AM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    3,902
    Likes Received
    1941 times
    Likes Given
    2388

    Re: Reaganomics and income inequality

    Quote Originally Posted by Diving Mullah View Post
    There's more evidence of a widening wealth inequality gap in America thanks to 30-plus years of Reaganomics. According to The Atlantic magazine - two-thirds of all new income in America between 2002 and 2007 went to just the top 1% of Americans. That's 2 out of every 3 dollars in America being sucked up by the richest of the rich.
    Not to mention - that the wealthiest 400 Americans - our nation's most senior oligarchs, who own more wealth than the bottom 150 million Americans - have seen their incomes double over the last twelve years while their tax rates have been cut in half. Talk about a "for the rich, by the rich" economy. Wealth inequality in America is at levels not seen since the 1920's - and we're now a more unequal nation than the Ivory Coast, Pakistan, Ethiopia, and Kazakhstan according to data from the CIA Factbook.

    So when the entire American middle class disappears, then can we all accept that Reagan's vision of America - and the direction that the current Republican Party has this nation headed - will lead us all toward ruin?
    Is three some researched based theory here, or just personal opinion?
    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    Generalizations are stupid.
    Quote Originally Posted by Joe Steel View Post
    The Second Amendment has nothing to do with guns.
    Im not good at math.
    Lois Lerner

  3. #3
    Sage
    SheWolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:13 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    18,367
    Likes Received
    5515 times
    Likes Given
    1011

    Re: Reaganomics and income inequality

    Quote Originally Posted by Μολὼν λαβέ View Post
    Is three some researched based theory here, or just personal opinion?
    He cited the research done by The Atlantic magazine.

  4. #4
    Villiage Idiot
    imagep's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Upstate SC
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 01:53 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    16,740
    Likes Received
    6430 times
    Likes Given
    19901

    Re: Reaganomics and income inequality

    Quote Originally Posted by Diving Mullah View Post
    There's more evidence of a widening wealth inequality gap in America thanks to 30-plus years of Reaganomics. According to The Atlantic magazine - two-thirds of all new income in America between 2002 and 2007 went to just the top 1% of Americans. That's 2 out of every 3 dollars in America being sucked up by the richest of the rich.
    Not to mention - that the wealthiest 400 Americans - our nation's most senior oligarchs, who own more wealth than the bottom 150 million Americans - have seen their incomes double over the last twelve years while their tax rates have been cut in half. Talk about a "for the rich, by the rich" economy. Wealth inequality in America is at levels not seen since the 1920's - and we're now a more unequal nation than the Ivory Coast, Pakistan, Ethiopia, and Kazakhstan according to data from the CIA Factbook.

    So when the entire American middle class disappears, then can we all accept that Reagan's vision of America - and the direction that the current Republican Party has this nation headed - will lead us all toward ruin?
    I'm not disagreeing with you, I am with you on all of that, but why do you post your "lean" as "very conservative"? Your going to be called a socialist by the many conservatives on this board who will expect you to "toe the line" of right wing rhetoric.

  5. #5
    User stevil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Indianapolis, In
    Last Seen
    09-02-11 @ 01:44 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    19
    Likes Received
    9 times
    Likes Given
    4

    Re: Reaganomics and income inequality

    Quote Originally Posted by Diving Mullah View Post
    Wealth inequality in America is at levels not seen since the 1920's - and we're now a more unequal nation than the Ivory Coast, Pakistan, Ethiopia, and Kazakhstan according to data from the CIA Factbook.
    And of course, any good liberal wants equal misery for all. Right? Oh, wait. You're "Very Conservative". As opposed to Marx?

    Yes, this is an opinion piece. He may cite research done by the Atlantic, but they cite "what" not "why". Research that says Big Mac sales are down says just that. It doesn't say that they are down because a political party doesn't want me to eat them. That would be opinion.

    In my opinion, if you want to know why the middle class is shrinking, why not look to Big Government programs that make it easier to survive poor than to move up to the middle class. Why work hard and pay for welfare, when you can squeak by and get paid by welfare?

    As for our economy, would you care to name a successful economy that was "for the poor, by the poor"? Seriously, there is some really silly stuff in the opinion part of your post.

  6. #6
    Educator pdog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Searching for answers.
    Last Seen
    11-19-14 @ 12:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    988
    Likes Received
    517 times
    Likes Given
    762

    Re: Reaganomics and income inequality

    Quote Originally Posted by stevil View Post
    Why work hard and pay for welfare, when you can squeak by and get paid by welfare?
    I'm still terribly surprised that stuff like this is the standard counter argument for the disparity of wealth that has been growing over the last 30 years. It takes about 2 seconds to find overwhelming evidence to the contrary. If you want to live in the dream world that all poor people are lazy AND none of them want to strive for something beyond poverty, fine. You even have the convenience of comparing working people to working people:
    Historical CEO compensation - Forbes.com

  7. #7
    Sage

    Join Date
    May 2011
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 06:43 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    5,959
    Likes Received
    2173 times
    Likes Given
    952

    Re: Reaganomics and income inequality

    Quote Originally Posted by pdog View Post
    I'm still terribly surprised that stuff like this is the standard counter argument for the disparity of wealth that has been growing over the last 30 years.
    "The disparity of wealth that has been growing over the last 30 years" is not an argument, so whatever you're complaining about is not really a counter-argument.

    Here's where the partisan fools are going wrong.

    Step 1) Observe growing wealth gap spanning 30 years.
    Step 2) Look to see who became president 30 years ago.
    Step 3) Consider whether you identify with the political party to which that president belonged.
    Step 4) If not, blame that president. Note: if you do identify with that political party, blame a predecessor or successor instead.

    Q: Whose sh*t do we buy?
    A: The sh*t the top 1% (corporations) produce and distribute to us.

    All together now: Consumers (including the middle class) are destroying themselves. No one will pay more for goods and services produced locally and humbly. No one. Because that's irrational. When we all cost-minimize, we reward the companies who also cost-minimize. And the ones who cost minimize best are the ones with the economies of scale. We all buy from the top, we get all their cheap sh*t, and they get all our money. Yes, it really really is just that simple. It's all rooted in our collective preferences.
    Last edited by Neomalthusian; 08-30-11 at 02:18 AM.

  8. #8
    warrior of the wetlands
    TurtleDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    107,095
    Likes Received
    32414 times
    Likes Given
    33279

    Re: Reaganomics and income inequality

    Quote Originally Posted by Μολὼν λαβέ View Post
    Is three some researched based theory here, or just personal opinion?
    another whine about the rich.
    Quote Originally Posted by EarlzP View Post
    Why would you not want to register your weapon?

  9. #9
    warrior of the wetlands
    TurtleDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    107,095
    Likes Received
    32414 times
    Likes Given
    33279

    Re: Reaganomics and income inequality

    Quote Originally Posted by imagep View Post
    I'm not disagreeing with you, I am with you on all of that, but why do you post your "lean" as "very conservative"? Your going to be called a socialist by the many conservatives on this board who will expect you to "toe the line" of right wing rhetoric.
    well very conservative is called by some "reactionary" and currently the reactionary position is to demand more and more government so he might be accurate in a perverse way
    Quote Originally Posted by EarlzP View Post
    Why would you not want to register your weapon?

  10. #10
    Educator pdog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Searching for answers.
    Last Seen
    11-19-14 @ 12:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    988
    Likes Received
    517 times
    Likes Given
    762

    Re: Reaganomics and income inequality

    Quote Originally Posted by Neomalthusian View Post
    "The disparity of wealth that has been growing over the last 30 years" is not an argument, so whatever you're complaining about is not really a counter-argument.
    Ughh. The previous poster complained the OP was an "opinion piece". I posted "help" that should provide more than enough "argument" to support at least part of the OP.

    Quote Originally Posted by Neomalthusian View Post
    Here's where the partisan fools are going wrong.

    Step 1) Observe growing wealth gap spanning 30 years.
    Step 2) Look to see who became president 30 years ago.
    Step 3) Consider whether you identify with the political party to which that president belonged.
    Step 4) If not, blame that president. Note: if you do identify with that political party, blame a predecessor or successor instead.
    This is why I avoid the term "Reaganomics" and use "Supply Side Theory" instead. Call it what you will, the period brought the most violent changes in our tax code since the 1920's. And things like income inequality and the debt shot up from the very same period. I'll give you the corolation argument, but corolation is all you have in complex systems.

    Quote Originally Posted by Neomalthusian View Post
    Q: Whose sh*t do we buy?
    A: The sh*t the top 1% (corporations) produce and distribute to us.


    All together now: Consumers (including the middle class) are destroying themselves. No one will pay more for goods and services produced locally and humbly. No one. Because that's irrational. When we all cost-minimize, we reward the companies who also cost-minimize. And the ones who cost minimize best are the ones with the economies of scale. We all buy from the top, we get all their cheap sh*t, and they get all our money. Yes, it really really is just that simple. It's all rooted in our collective preferences.
    And there it is, the other classic argument. The sleight of hand that swaps personal finances with corporate finances and pretends they are the same. I'll give you that trade deficit is not helping us. But you've got some wires crossed with your ideas here. What is good or bad for a business does not explain a growing gap between the top and bottom components in that same business.

Posting Permissions

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