View Poll Results: What should be done to battle income inequality in the USA?

Voters
92. You may not vote on this poll
  • Do not intervene

    47 51.09%
  • Yes, do intervene

    45 48.91%
Page 86 of 101 FirstFirst ... 3676848586878896 ... LastLast
Results 851 to 860 of 1006

Thread: Income Inequality

  1. #851
    Sage
    Born Free's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Sonny and Nice
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:49 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    6,396

    Re: Income Inequality

    Quote Originally Posted by Dittohead not! View Post
    Re: The supply and demand for unskilled labor:

    Yes, the point has been made that the price of unskilled labor is set by supply and demand.

    Therefore, the motivation of the employers of unskilled labor is to keep the supply as high as possible.

    Now, that said, who is it that is really in favor of illegal immigration by unskilled workers?
    I can tell you it's not the businesses of Texas, but instead it's the business of Obama.
    Liberals - Punish the Successful, Reward the Unsuccessful
    Liberals - Tax, Borrow, Spend, and Give Free Stuff
    Obama's legacy - President Donald Trump

  2. #852
    Sage
    Born Free's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Sonny and Nice
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:49 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    6,396

    Re: Income Inequality

    Quote Originally Posted by VanceMack View Post
    High paying jobs are becoming more valuable, low skilled non technical positions remain a dime a dozen. You can't replace a do for or chemist with some schmuck off the street. You can replace most non-skilled employees. There is an abundance of non skilled workers both homegrown and immigrant. Can't be surprised low level jobs remain low wage jobs.
    Your right, but when you have a president with no job growth policies there will always be more unemployed than should be. When there are more jobs than people and take them wages go up. But you can see under Obama wages are down from 6 yrs ago. Growth creates demand for jobs, thus higher pay for the middle class. This is something the liberals could never figure out. But hell they never have been for the middle class as they are not for introducing pro-growth policies.
    Liberals - Punish the Successful, Reward the Unsuccessful
    Liberals - Tax, Borrow, Spend, and Give Free Stuff
    Obama's legacy - President Donald Trump

  3. #853
    Educator
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Last Seen
    07-18-15 @ 02:26 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    731

    Re: Income Inequality

    Quote Originally Posted by GBFAN View Post
    If you look REAL close, you'll see that calGun's statement is factually correct - today, 3.2 million people are in the top 1%, whereas in 1922, only 1.9 million were. It makes perfect sense given that the population in 1922 was significantly less. You need to read closer.
    No, you aren't following. CalGun argued that the top 1% OF WEALTH was controlled by 1.2 million people in 1922, but today it is spread around to 3.2 million people, so the wealth is less concentrated today. But of course, that is just him getting mixed up. That isn't who owns 1% of the wealth, that is 1% of the population lol.

    Don't tell others to "read closer" before you've done so yourself.

  4. #854
    Educator
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Last Seen
    07-18-15 @ 02:26 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    731

    Re: Income Inequality

    Quote Originally Posted by gdgyva View Post
    on this site being specific helps
    Seems you just were not reading carefully. I did say that specifically.

    Quote Originally Posted by gdgyva View Post
    what percentage of profits is the employee due according to you

    15% apparently isnt enough.....what would be
    Again, in a capitalist system, compensation is supposed to track very closely with productivity. In a perfect theoretical model, compensation would be 99.9999999999999% of productivity. In reality, we don't live in a perfect market. In the 1960s, it was around 95%. Today it is around 45%. Obviously the closer to 100%, the better, but any improvement is good. If we could get to even just 75%, that would be a massive leap forward for the country. If we got all the way back to 95%, we would be a truly wealthy nation like that earth has never seen before.

  5. #855
    Educator
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Last Seen
    07-18-15 @ 02:26 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    731

    Re: Income Inequality

    Quote Originally Posted by Conservative65 View Post
    When things don't play out, don't always blame the theory but the players. The problem is too many people today feel they are entitled to something rather than the way people used to operate. It used to be that people took it upon themselves to better themselves. Now, they want someone else to make it easier to do it. In both situations, the theory hasn't changed, the people have. As far as changing that, you don't change the theory because people don't do it that way they should. They can either do what is expected or suffer the consequences.

    That I have taken it upon myself to do what I expect of others when it comes to bettering myself, your thoughts about a deep seated desire to obey are absolutely false. You're the one that says things need to change when it's the attitudes of people that need to change. Seems you're admitting that you would rather have someone do it for you than get off your butt and do it yourself. I won't ask it as a question because I already know. You should have some dignity and do for yourself.
    Not sure what "blaming the theory" or "changing the theory" would even mean.

    I think there are a lot of causes. Corruption of the Republican Party by the rich obviously plays a big role. The reduction of most markets to oligopoly is a huge part of it. But, no, it doesn't make sense to blame the employees. Again, productivity has been shooting up, so the employees obviously are doing their part. Amazingly, they have even continued to rapidly increase their productivity for decades after they stopped being rewarded for it.

  6. #856
    Educator
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Last Seen
    07-18-15 @ 02:26 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    731

    Re: Income Inequality

    Quote Originally Posted by GBFAN View Post
    Man, you need to get a job ... or an eraser.

    You are trying to make it black and white ... since more people are working (your words) more hours (your words), that proves that requiring benefits (and, by extension, raising taxes) doesn't adversely affect the economy??? You really believe that? Seriously?? You need to take a macroeconomics course ... or one in logic.

    Doesn't it seem perfectly logical that if you take $1,000 away from my company, that I have $1,000 less to hire people, expand, or do R&D? Let's think about that for a minute ...

    Why do I provide benefits to my employees? Not because I have to (though, in some cases, the government has seen fit to inject itself into my corporate management structure) ... I provide them because my benefits package is an enticement to get the best employees available. Because I have attracted the best employees, my company is much more efficient, successful and profitable. I am getting a direct return on my investment.

    If business has to provide that same benefit package to all employees in all companies, that incentive is lost, and I get nothing in return for my investment. You are now asking me to subsidize the sub-standard, and under-performing, employees. Another incentive for quality worker performance is negated by the government - everybody gets treated equally. You, on the other hand, are an A-1, upstanding, outstanding, outproducing employee. What's your reward for working so hard? Oh yeah ... nothing. Nothing other than watching those around you get the same you get despite the fact that they are producing half what you do.

    It just doesn't make sense ... you're about two steps from the same wages (and benefits) for everybody regardless of their contribution. THAT is scary stuff ...
    LOL. So your stance is that companies can't afford to hire people because they hire too many people? And you're sitting there condescending to me? Might want to rethink that buddy.

  7. #857
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Canada, Costa Rica
    Last Seen
    05-16-16 @ 09:45 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,645

    Re: Income Inequality

    Quote Originally Posted by tuhaybey View Post
    I think there are a lot of causes. Corruption of the Republican Party by the rich obviously plays a big role.
    It's A Myth That GOP Is Party Of The Wealthy - Investors.com
    The reduction of most markets to oligopoly is a huge part of it. But, no, it doesn't make sense to blame the employees. Again, productivity has been shooting up, so the employees obviously are doing their part. Amazingly, they have even continued to rapidly increase their productivity for decades after they stopped being rewarded for it.
    Technology may play a role in this productivity claim.Momentum Machines Burger Robot - Business Insider

  8. #858
    Guru
    sawdust's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Last Seen
    03-04-16 @ 09:47 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    3,177

    Re: Income Inequality

    Quote Originally Posted by Peter Grimm View Post
    It's indisputable fact that income inequality in the United States has grown substantially in the past few decades.

    Median nominal incomes, adjusted for inflation, have not gone up in the USA since the 50's. (Median is the halfway point, so we are talking about the middle-earner). In contrast, the per capita GDP has risen quite dramatically, due to the increased purchasing power of the upper echelon.


    I pose three questions to you:

    1.) What has caused this phenomenon
    2.) What are the long term implications if the trend is allowed to continue
    3.) What, if anything, should be done to adjust our course


    Thanks
    1. It takes money to make money.

    2. None.

    3. Nothing.

    People who believe that income inequality is an issue don't understand game theory. The economy is not a zero sum game. The fact that someone has a lot of money doesn't mean that someone else can't make a lot of money because the number of dollars in the economy may be finite but money and value are not synonyms.

    Also not understood is that a persons ability to make money isn't predicated on their ability to spend it. The concept of a living wage is psycobabble. A persons ability to make money is directly related to their ability to create value with their time and labor. That's why doctors and CEO's make more money than fast food workers.
    "A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the majority discovers it can vote itself largess out of the public treasury." Attributed to Alexander Tytler

  9. #859
    Sage
    Dittohead not!'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    The Golden State
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    41,582

    Re: Income Inequality

    Quote Originally Posted by Born Free View Post
    I can tell you it's not the businesses of Texas, but instead it's the business of Obama.
    and the Congress.
    "Donald Trump is a phony, a fraud... [he's] playing the American public for suckers." Mitt Romney

  10. #860
    Educator
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Colorado Springs, CO
    Last Seen
    10-23-14 @ 02:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    945

    Re: Income Inequality

    Quote Originally Posted by Gimmesometruth View Post
    The give-away, the tell....is not being able to say WHAT was taken out of context.
    You are once again putting the cart in front of the horse, since half the states already are RTW, and union membership has already declined, unions generally don't have the force to effect wages, benefits. Again, this is a cause of the hollowing out of the middle class, an explanation for DECLINING WAGES and increase inequality.


    Don't worry your pretty little head, collective bargaining for the remaining stronghold of unions, govt workers, will soon be a thing of the past, another nail in the coffin for workers, a further eroding of wages, a cause of growing inequality.


    You have little historical perspective, the combo of containerization/low shipping costs and the relaxing of trade barriers to US markets is what allowed off-shoring to be economically feasible. After the standardization in 1965, containerization costs plummeted. Profit is the driving force, the ability to undercut domestic producers with govt subsidization and grab market share was the play, whether it was steel, cars, electronics, optics...you name it. We never had a domestic industrial policy, we never tried to protect domestic workers.

    You can't sell a US made car in Japan or China or Germany at below costs....they won't allow it.

    If you wish to exploit with sweatshop labor....that is your choice. Like most corporations, you have already cast aspersions upon US workers, showing no loyalty towards them. it is pure Randianism.



    Like I said, there you are. I have seen this expressed a million times by corporatists.

    Yawn, and away we go with the personal anecdotes substituting for data.

    You're right ... I have no loyalty to an American worker. I pay the laborer for his efforts, and he does his job. My job is to produce maximum profitability for my investors ... period. Increasing the laborer's take home pay is NOT in my job description. The only reason I would pay more is because that's what it would take to produce maximum profitability.

    Clearly, the American workforce is no longer interested in maximizing their work level in order to get better pay. They expect to get it, whether they produce or not. Our government's entitlement philosophy has infected our labor force.

    You're right and you're wrong - some countries won't allow US cars to be sold overseas, but most countries won't ... but, even if they would, we can't be cost competitive, so it's a non-issue. As for your containerization argument, if you're looking for an excuse, that's as good as any. If you're unwilling to look at reality, that is as good a subterfuge as any.

    My personal anecdotes?? You're right .... but then, my personal anecdotes created 300 jobs and about $40 million a year in business. How are your personal anecdotes doing?

    To call out the 1945 - 1979 time frame to demonstrate that socialism is a viable solution .. oh wait, you call it 'sharing the wealth', don't you? - is almost laughable. Perhaps you can tell me what time frame that unions were the most powerful and forced 'sharing the wealth'. I'm guessing it will be the same time frame ... ya think? What the hell makes you think those wage increases were 'voluntary'????
    We're born alone, we live alone, we die alone. Only through our love and friendship can we create the illusion for the moment that we're not alone.
    - Orson Welles

Page 86 of 101 FirstFirst ... 3676848586878896 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

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