• 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!

Over 90% of the income gains in the first year of the recovery went to the top 1%

:yawn: so? why should I care what the rich make?

Because too much concentration of wealth at the top has a detrimental effect on the the economy. It's the economy, stupid

"The greater the disparity in wealth between the very rich and everyone else, the more unstable an economy becomes.

Our nation has now created a larger gap in the distribution of wealth than the massive chasm that helped fuel the Great Depression.

In 1928, one year before the global economic collapse, the wealthiest .001% of the U.S. population owned 892 times more than 90% of the nation’s citizens. Today, the top .001% of the U.S. population owns 976 times more than the entire bottom 90%. This is not sustainable, and makes for a very volatile economy. It would appear that the American empire is about to crash.
Source: EcoLocalizer (Plutocracy Reborn: U.S. Wealth Inequality Gap Largest since 1928)

Plutocracy Reborn: U.S. Wealth Inequality Gap Largest since 1928
 
:yawn: so? why should I care what the rich make? let them worry about themselves, they appear to be good enough at it.
Why dont you know? If it wasnt for the wealthy investing and earning that money the poor could be doing it! And raking in all the bennies and proceeds and...

Oh....wait...I see the flaw in that logic. They dont earn...dont invest...47% of them dont even contribute to the resources they leech off of and if it wasnt for the top 10%, the great majority of them would starve, die, and rot in a heap somewhere.

Huh...
 
I have posted this a few times, and I am going to post it again.

The rich are getting richer and richer because the poor and middle classes give all of their money to the rich. The poor and middle classes refuse to spend their money on small or locally owned businesses. They want the cheap crap sold by big box stores, made in sweat shops in china, and love contributing to the wealth separation in this country because they feel like they got a deal.

If the poor and middle class want to balance things out, STOP GIVING ALL YOUR MONEY TO THE RICH! Seriously stop going to walmart and instead buy your clothes from local people who make them. Stop buying your groceries from chain stores that import veggies artificially grown and visit a damn farmers market. You will pay a bit more, but you will be helping someone else who is struggling. You will be bridging the gap between the wealthy and the poor. You will be helping to stabilize the American economy.

But nooooooo. Most people are going to shrug say they don't give a crap, spend their check at Wal-Mart then cry because the rich keep getting richer and good jobs are leaving. Consumers are the problem. Big business is filling the demand that we create.
 
Because too much concentration of wealth at the top has a detrimental effect on the the economy. It's the economy, stupid

"The greater the disparity in wealth between the very rich and everyone else, the more unstable an economy becomes.

Our nation has now created a larger gap in the distribution of wealth than the massive chasm that helped fuel the Great Depression.

In 1928, one year before the global economic collapse, the wealthiest .001% of the U.S. population owned 892 times more than 90% of the nation’s citizens. Today, the top .001% of the U.S. population owns 976 times more than the entire bottom 90%. This is not sustainable, and makes for a very volatile economy. It would appear that the American empire is about to crash.
Source: EcoLocalizer (Plutocracy Reborn: U.S. Wealth Inequality Gap Largest since 1928)

Plutocracy Reborn: U.S. Wealth Inequality Gap Largest since 1928

nah. there is nothing inherently unstable about having some people do better than others. it doesn't matter what the wealthy makes - it matters that the poor and lower income folks continue to have the ability and incentive to make more.
 
nah. there is nothing inherently unstable about having some people do better than others.

The historical record of the Great Depression and the Great Recession argue otherwise. Corrections in the tax system and financial regulations were needed in both cases.
 
nah. there is nothing inherently unstable about having some people do better than others. it doesn't matter what the wealthy makes - it matters that the poor and lower income folks continue to have the ability and incentive to make more.

The incentive to make more is always there. What isn't always present is opportunity or ability.
 
The incentive to make more is always there. What isn't always present is opportunity or ability.

Ability? How the **** do you propose to legislate ability? Opportunity is being crushed by regulatory burden on small businesses. The more onerous you make regulation on business without differentiating between small businesses and large, the easier it become for large businesses to put the small guy out.
 
The historical record of the Great Depression and the Great Recession argue otherwise.

not really. correlation =/= causation, and you will note they only cite select years. I could make an equally well-backed case regarding the economic effects of the length of womens' skirts.
 
Last edited:
The incentive to make more is always there.

:( sadly this is not the case, as we have discovered with some of our best-intentioned programs.

What isn't always present is opportunity or ability.

not yet. one day, perhaps; but currently it is only difficult for many of our lower-income folks. I am all for improving their abilities to do so, which is why I am such a huge advocate of education reform, and such a huge disparager of our easy-divorce culture.
 
Ability? How the **** do you propose to legislate ability? Opportunity is being crushed by regulatory burden on small businesses. The more onerous you make regulation on business without differentiating between small businesses and large, the easier it become for large businesses to put the small guy out.

which is why the dirty not-so-secret is that large business usually welcomes government interference in their market. not only does it protect them from competition by small businesses, but they often get to write the rules by which they are governed, thereby protecting their market share. Everyone out there who thinks you can Get Big Fill-In-Industry through a heavier government hand... that's like arguing that you're going to go hunt sharks by throwing baby seals at them.
 
which is why the dirty not-so-secret is that large business usually welcomes government interference in their market. not only does it protect them from competition by small businesses, but they often get to write the rules by which they are governed, thereby protecting their market share. Everyone out there who thinks you can Get Big Fill-In-Industry through a heavier government hand... that's like arguing that you're going to go hunt sharks by throwing baby seals at them.

Just like the uber wealthy often prefer big estate tax rates and high income tax rates. It helps them at the expense of the almost very rich and the upper middle class
 
Just like the uber wealthy often prefer big estate tax rates and high income tax rates. It helps them at the expense of the almost very rich and the upper middle class

Really!?!?!?! I have never heard that before. Could you please post some links and expert analysis to prove this claim?
 
Really!?!?!?! I have never heard that before. Could you please post some links and expert analysis to prove this claim?

Soros and Buffett

Look it up
 
Soros and Buffett

Look it up

Two people!?!?!?! You got to be kidding. The opinion of two people - which you failed to present - means nothing in a nation of 311 million people.

And you look it up. Its your claim. Then report back here with a link to your evidence.
 
Two people!?!?!?! You got to be kidding. The opinion of two people - which you failed to present - means nothing in a nation of 311 million people.

And you look it up. Its your claim. Then report back here with a link to your evidence.

I am so glad you said that

I will repeat it the next time you or other lefties whine about the tax rates a few people pay as justification for the "Buffett rule" or getting rid of the current capital gains tax structure
 
not really. correlation =/= causation, and you will note they only cite select years. I could make an equally well-backed case regarding the economic effects of the length of womens' skirts.

History argues differently:

"a list of the top reasons that historians and economists have cited as causing the Great Depression:

1. Stock Market Crash of 1929
Many believe erroneously that the stock market crash that occurred on Black Tuesday, October 29, 1929 is one and the same with the Great Depression. In fact, it was one of the major causes that led to the Great Depression. Two months after the original crash in October, stockholders had lost more than $40 billion dollars. Even though the stock market began to regain some of its losses, by the end of 1930, it just was not enough and America truly entered what is called the Great Depression.

2. Bank Failures
Throughout the 1930s over 9,000 banks failed. Bank deposits were uninsured and thus as banks failed people simply lost their savings. Surviving banks, unsure of the economic situation and concerned for their own survival, stopped being as willing to create new loans. This exacerbated the situation leading to less and less expenditures.

3. Reduction in Purchasing Across the Board
With the stock market crash and the fears of further economic woes, individuals from all classes stopped purchasing items. This then led to a reduction in the number of items produced and thus a reduction in the workforce. As people lost their jobs, they were unable to keep up with paying for items they had bought through installment plans and their items were repossessed. More and more inventory began to accumulate. The unemployment rate rose above 25% which meant, of course, even less spending to help alleviate the economic situation.

4. American Economic Policy with Europe
As businesses began failing, the government created the Smoot-Hawley Tariff in 1930 to help protect American companies. This charged a high tax for imports thereby leading to less trade between America and foreign countries along with some economic retaliation.

5. Drought Conditions
While not a direct cause of the Great Depression, the drought that occurred in the Mississippi Valley in 1930 was of such proportions that many could not even pay their taxes or other debts and had to sell their farms for no profit to themselves. The area was nicknamed "The Dust Bowl." This was the topic of John Steinbeck's The Grapes of Wrath."

Great Depression - Top Five Causes of the Great Depression

"The Glass–Steagall Act was enacted after the Great Depression. It separated commercial banks and investment banks, in part to avoid potential conflicts of interest between the lending activities of the former and rating activities of the latter. Economist Joseph Stiglitz criticized the repeal of the Act. He called its repeal the "culmination of a $300 million lobbying effort by the banking and financial services industries...spearheaded in Congress by Senator Phil Gramm." He believes it contributed to this crisis because the risk-taking culture of investment banking dominated the more conservative commercial banking culture, leading to increased levels of risk-taking and leverage during the boom period.[8]
Economists Robert Kuttner and Paul Krugman have criticized the repeal of the Glass–Steagall Act by the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999 as possibly contributing to the subprime meltdown, although other economists disagree."

Financial Derivative Regulation / Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000

"The Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000 exempted derivatives from regulation, supervision, trading on established exchanges, and capital reserve requirements for major participants. Concerns that counterparties to derivative deals would be unable to pay their obligations caused pervasive uncertainty during the crisis. Particularly relevant to the crisis are credit default swaps (CDS), a derivative in which Party A pays Party B what is essentially an insurance premium, in exchange for payment should Party C default on its obligations. Warren Buffett famously referred to derivatives as "financial weapons of mass destruction" in early 2003"

"Credit default swaps are the rocket fuel that turned the subprime mortgage fire into a conflagration. They were the major cause of AIG’s – and by extension the banks’ – problems...In sum, if you offer a guarantee – no matter whether you call it a banking deposit, an insurance policy, or a bet – regulation should ensure you have the capital to deliver." He also wrote that banks bought CDS to enable them to reduce the amount of capital they were required to hold against investments, thereby avoiding capital regulations.[34] U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner has proposed a framework for legislation to regulate derivatives.["

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_policies_and_the_subprime_mortgage_crisis
 
Last edited:
Ability? How the **** do you propose to legislate ability? Opportunity is being crushed by regulatory burden on small businesses. The more onerous you make regulation on business without differentiating between small businesses and large, the easier it become for large businesses to put the small guy out.

I own a company that consults for small businesses. Most of the regulations and legislation that hurts them is on the state and local level. And the non-federal governments have to do that in order to raise money.

But I agree that small businesses should have fewer barriers.
 
I am so glad you said that

I will repeat it the next time you or other lefties whine about the tax rates a few people pay as justification for the "Buffett rule" or getting rid of the current capital gains tax structure

YOU were the one who claimed this tax position was something shared by one class of people over other classes of people. So prove it.

When you try to do these bogus comparisons of our positions you end up comparing apples to cinderblocks or engaging in basic fallacies. This is the latest example. Warren Buffett stating clearly that he as a wealthy man has benefitted from class warfare and citing reasons how is clear evidence that it exists because of that confession.

You claiming that very wealthy people as a class want to over tax less wealthy people to give them some advantage - is a broad and sweeping statement that you offer no substantive proof for beyond the opinion of two persons that believe in changing our tax code. And by the way, when Buffett and Soros advocate changing the tax code - they are advocating HIGHER taxes for the group you call the uber wealthy as well.

The argument you make lacks evidence, substance and even fails in your favorite area - common sense.
 
How does this post:
History argues differently:
"a list of the top reasons that historians and economists have cited as causing the Great Depression:
Support this position?
Because too much concentration of wealth at the top has a detrimental effect on the the economy.
"The greater the disparity in wealth between the very rich and everyone else, the more unstable an economy becomes.
Our nation has now created a larger gap in the distribution of wealth than the massive chasm that helped fuel the Great Depression.
Or this one?
The historical record of the Great Depression and the Great Recession argue otherwise. Corrections in the tax system…were needed in both cases.
 
How does this post:

Support this position?

Or this one?

Apparently, you missed this:

"In 1928, one year before the global economic collapse, the wealthiest .001% of the U.S. population owned 892 times more than 90% of the nation’s citizens. Today, the top .001% of the U.S. population owns 976 times more than the entire bottom 90%. This is not sustainable, and makes for a very volatile economy. It would appear that the American empire is about to crash."

And there is this as well:

"First, the rich spend a smaller proportion of their wealth than the less-affluent, and so when more and more wealth becomes concentrated in the hands of the wealth, there is less overall spending and less overall manufacturing to meet consumer needs.Second, in both the Roaring 20s and 2000-2007 period, the middle class incurred a lot of debt to pay for the things they wanted, as their real wages were stagnating and they were getting a smaller and smaller piece of the pie. In other words, they had less and less wealth, and so they borrowed more and more to make up the difference. As Reich notes:
Between 1913 and 1928, the ratio of private credit to the total national economy nearly doubled. Total mortgage debt was almost three times higher in 1929 than in 1920. Eventually, in 1929, as in 2008, there were “no more poker chips to be loaned on credit,” in [former Fed chairman Mariner] Eccles' words. And “when their credit ran out, the game stopped.”​
And third, since the wealthy accumulated more, they wanted to invest more, so a lot of money poured into speculative investments, leading to huge bubbles, which eventually burst. Reich points out:
In the 1920s, richer Americans created stock and real estate bubbles that foreshadowed those of the late 1990s and 2000s. The Dow Jones Stock Index ballooned from 63.9 in mid-1921 to a peak of 381.2 eight years later, before it plunged. There was also frantic speculation in land. The Florida real estate boom lured thousands of investors into the Everglades, from where many never returned, at least financially.

Wall Street cheered them on in the 1920s, almost exactly as it did in the 2000s."

Extreme Inequality Helped Cause Both the Great Depression and the Current Economic Crisis → Washingtons Blog

And this:

"Cracks in the Economic Foundation

After the Great Crash, the American public sought a scapegoat for the economic collapse. Some held President Hoover responsible, others targeted the "three B's"--brokers, bankers, and businessmen. But the cause of the Great Depression could not be attributed to one individual or even a group of people. The roots of the Great Depression were in the very structure of the American economy, namely:

1. Unequal distribution of wealth and income.

Despite rising wages overall, income distribution was unequal. Gaps in income had actually increased since the 1890s. The 1% of the population at the very top of the pyramid had incomes 650% greater than those 11% of Americans at the bottom of the pyramid. The tremendous concentration of wealth in the hands of a few meant that continued economic prosperity was dependent on the high investment and luxury spending of the wealthy. However, both the high spending and high investment of the time, much like today, were susceptible to economic fluctuations; they were much less stable than people's expenses on daily necessities like food, clothing, and shelter. Therefore, when the market crashed and the economy tumbled, both big spending and big investment collapsed, as well."

http://us.history.wisc.edu/hist102/lectures/lecture19.html
 
Last edited:
Apparently, you missed this:

I guess I missed it again. Please point out where in the post it claimed 'Corrections in the tax system…were needed in both cases.'
 
I've documented above the extreme wealth disparity that existed prior to both the Great Depression and the Great Recession.

This is one of the ways we addressed that situation after the GD:

Tax+Rate.jpg


The tax rates for those at the top will have to go up at this time to help address the extreme wealth disparity in this country not seen since 1928.
 
The incentive to make more is always there. What isn't always present is opportunity or ability.
Horse****. PLENTY of opportunity AND ability. Too many pathetic whiners blaming everyone else for their own miserable pathetic failed lives...THERES your problem.
 
Horse****. PLENTY of opportunity AND ability. Too many pathetic whiners blaming everyone else for their own miserable pathetic failed lives...THERES your problem.

Sounds so easy.... I wish I could exist in this easy world.
 
Back
Top Bottom