Rich-Poor gap widening

phattonez said:

I read it. There's nothing substantial, only conjecture. Try again to find some real data.

Click to expand...

So let me get this, you offer conjecture, and complain because you get conjecture in return? :lamo

well, instead of conjecture one could always simply paste a link from DAVID VINES

LOL!

or EZRA KLEIN, the founder of JOURNOLIST

Aunt Spiker said:

Jobs and money?

Nevermind the PRODUCT or SERVICE they provide for a cost to the masses?

THAT should be the base focus and concern for a corporation - when they lose sight of that as key importance then they fall apart. . . as we've seen in the last few decades.

Click to expand...

jobs are nothing more than a corporation trying to obtain a necessary commodity known as LABOR.

you are right when corporations, or those who whine about them, lose sight of the fact that PROFIT is the main reason for creating a corporation, things go to hell quickly

Aunt Spiker said:

Jobs and money?

Nevermind the PRODUCT or SERVICE they provide for a cost to the masses?

THAT should be the base focus and concern for a corporation - when they lose sight of that as key importance then they fall apart. . . as we've seen in the last few decades.

Click to expand...

Certainly they will fall apart of they don't provide satisfactory goods or services. It happens all the time and it will continue to happen.

Why is this noteworthy?

The difference recently is that big government, big business and big unions are all in the same bed. What a racket that is!!

What does any of this have to do with the rich-poor gap widening? I guess I just have two questions for now to anyone who thinks it is ok:

1) Would you agree that the increasing/decreasing tax rates have clear affects on the rich/poor gap?
2) Are things better now and at the turn of the 20th century than they were in the middle of the 20th century?

In case you forgot, here is that graph again (I appear to have lost the link to my original source but here is another):

Wealth And Inequality In America


Hopefully someone can find a better income tax link than my wikipedia one:



Other credible links on the widening income gap.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/29/business/worldbusiness/29iht-income.4.5075504.html
Inequality in America: The rich, the poor and the growing gap between them | The Economist

And a few more charts for fun:


More proof that cash flows up hill. If you give tax breaks to the wealthy, they keep the money.

You forgot the second part: Rich-poor gap widening, Republicans angry that it's not wider.

Grant said:

At one time a man with a regular job could work and support a family because his taxes were low. In the late 1940's only about 10% of his income was sent to the government. Today it is almost impossible for a regular working man to support a family because he has to work almost half the year for the government and the remainder for his family.

It naturally follows that because of the high cost of government the working class is going to suffer, and their incomes shrink.

Instead of making "the rich" pay more taxes people should encourage less government spending. That would put more money in the pockets of the people and the middle class will be more able to recover. But with government spending trillions of dollars each year someone is going to have to pay, and its the rich who have the tax lawyers, not the working class.

The simple fact of the matter is that government has become far too expensive, and people just can't afford it, rich and poor. What happens when the rich are no longer there to foot the bills?

Click to expand...

1. No one, rich nor poor, have to work almost 1/2 the year to pay taxes. All in taxes to most people are in the 20-35% level.
2. The fundamental problem we have right now is the fantasy that we can solve our budget problem cutting government expenditures. In fact, there is a very good argument that for every dollar cut in government expenditures we will cut tax revenue by a multiple greater than the cut, likely magnifying the problem. (cutting government expenses will directly cut government jobs plus the jobs in the private sector that provide direct and tangential products and services... this will increase unemployment and reduce tax revenues). This over-simplified populist approach to our economy is nothing short of madness.

1/3 of our current budget deficit is the slow economy. US tax collections fell from $2.5T in 2008 to $2.1T in 2009. Had the economy not gone into recession, tax receipts right now would be about $3.0T

whysoserious said:

Even Reagen knew his initial tax cuts went too far. Trickle-down economics has been proven false time and time again. Not to mention, it's just common sense. When people make money, they don't give it away, they invest it so that they can make more money with it.

Click to expand...

Really? That's not what the facts demonstrate, the facts demonstrate the progressives have taxed the hell out the successful people in the United States and rewarded the slothful to the tune of wasting some 15.9 trillion dollars over the past few decades with the expectation of spending another 10.3 trillion more on such waste in the next decade, on welfare alone....and even with all the collected and wasted taxes the democrats have relegated one in every seven US CITIZENS into becoming nothing more than continual generational welfare recipients to act as a perpetual base for their political power, just like they use the unions to laundry TAX MONEY. Why has the poverty index went to well over 15% over the last few years (the greatest in US HISTORY) from the time that 1.5 trillion dollars has been wasted? And why the demand to spend another 10.3 Trillion on welfare alone over the next decade....IF the intention is have more middle class people and less poverty?

This is nothing but Marxist jealousy. Just like Marx figured out there is one constant truism that is universal to human nature, the less successful always have a natural envy and resentment of the more successful, and second there is political power in numbers, and there are countless gullible pawns that are duped into believing they are getting something for nothing but in reality are selling their souls for the right to remain in poverty, right down on the new virtual plantations...keeping the wealthy elite new england blue bloods in political power.

In a system of capitalism there is no one that is born into that system that will BE mandated to remain in that social status as capitalism allows the freedom to move about social status' and positions depending upon the drive and desire generated by one's work ethic. Some of the most powerful and wealthiest people in the United States were born poor and had no formal education whatsoever. The truth is the more millionaires and billionaires that are produced by this system, its simply a tribute to the successful nature of this system that offers the only true FREEDOM to be found on earth as everything is based on Freewill and not governmental mandates.

The democrats have found success in using the same tactics that Marx used, pitting the lower class society (Proletariat) against the supposed elite (Bourgeois)...in this case, THOSE EVIL RICH BASTARDS and CORPORATIONS. Just look at the public service teachers in Wisconsin...they have been brainwashed with the Class Warfare bull**** so long they are continuing to act as if they are striking against some FAT CAT evil Billionaires Club instead of their neighboring TAX PAYERS whom they work for....they can't get off the same old record, its the RICH against the POOR...yada, yada, yada. Its a shameful joke...to even think that gullible idiots such as these are actually charged with teaching our children. Its no wonder there is no CRITICAL THINKING in reasoned logic going on in this nation...if this is what our children are learning in the class rooms.

Obama to Spend $10.3 Trillion on Welfare: Uncovering the Full Cost of Means-Tested Welfare or Aid to the Poor | The Heritage Foundation

apdst said:

Believe that...:lamo

Click to expand...

You make quite the case! :lamo

upsideguy said:

1. No one, rich nor poor, have to work almost 1/2 the year to pay taxes. All in taxes to most people are in the 20-35% level.
2. The fundamental problem we have right now is the fantasy that we can solve our budget problem cutting government expenditures. In fact, there is a very good argument that for every dollar cut in government expenditures we will cut tax revenue by a multiple greater than the cut, likely magnifying the problem. (cutting government expenses will directly cut government jobs plus the jobs in the private sector that provide direct and tangential products and services... this will increase unemployment and reduce tax revenues). This over-simplified populist approach to our economy is nothing short of madness.

1/3 of our current budget deficit is the slow economy. US tax collections fell from $2.5T in 2008 to $2.1T in 2009. Had the economy not gone into recession, tax receipts right now would be about $3.0T

Click to expand...

So, if the government wasn't killing jobs, we would be in much better shape?

Troubadour said:

You forgot the second part: Rich-poor gap widening, Republicans angry that it's not wider.

Click to expand...

that's really stupid and has no basis in fact

TurtleDude said:

that's really stupid and has no basis in fact

Click to expand...

you prove it with almost every post you make

How are tax hikes on the rich going to close gap between rich and poor?

apdst said:

How are tax hikes on the rich going to close gap between rich and poor?

Click to expand...

let's see if i can use an intentionally simple analogy to make it evident

you and i go to lunch, and you pick up the tab because you can afford it much better than i

justabubba said:

let's see if i can use an intentionally simple analogy to make it evident

you and i go to lunch, and you pick up the tab because you can afford it much better than i

Click to expand...

So, you wanna close the gap with more government handouts?

I think I'll just use my own gumption and make it on my own. If the government will get the **** out of the way, that is.

apdst said:

So, you wanna close the gap with more government handouts?

I think I'll just use my own gumption and make it on my own. If the government will get the **** out of the way, that is.

Click to expand...

it is obvious the analogy went over your head
i am sorry, but i cannot make what should be simply obvious, simpler
i have no choice but to find whatever you post without any foundation of understanding

justabubba said:

it is obvious the analogy went over your head
i am sorry, but i cannot make what should be simply obvious, simpler
i have no choice but to find whatever you post without any foundation of understanding

Click to expand...

Oh no, I understood your analogy. You want someone else to pay the bills. I get it and I'll pass, thanks anyway.

apdst said:

Oh no, I understood your analogy. You want someone else to pay the bills. I get it and I'll pass, thanks anyway.

Click to expand...

it is again evident that you do not
dismissed

Boo Radley said:

So let me get this, you offer conjecture, and complain because you get conjecture in return? :lamo

Click to expand...

What conjecture? You never directly responded to the real data I showed about income inequality. Don't try to back out of an argument and say I offerred nothing when you refuse to deal with what I presented.

Here again is real data from real professors looking at the issue.

http://www.debatepolitics.com/break...rich-poor-gap-widening-14.html#post1059309268

Your link was just opinion, there was no real data in there.

And here's the problem with following income data in the first place.

http://www.debatepolitics.com/economics/81991-following-income-some-problems.html

I'll just wait here for some real responses.

phattonez said:

What conjecture? You never directly responded to the real data I showed about income inequality. Don't try to back out of an argument and say I offerred nothing when you refuse to deal with what I presented.

Here again is real data from real professors looking at the issue.

http://www.debatepolitics.com/break...rich-poor-gap-widening-14.html#post1059309268

Your link was just opinion, there was no real data in there.

And here's the problem with following income data in the first place.

http://www.debatepolitics.com/economics/81991-following-income-some-problems.html

I'll just wait here for some real responses.

Click to expand...

I never try to back out. What you linked before did not show me any real data. And nothing here addresses the issue either. Your claim is that work ethic is less today or worse than it was in the past. That's a hard thing to prove. Someone's opinion is not likely better than someone elses. And your states don't really address this issue.

Boo Radley said:

I never try to back out. What you linked before did not show me any real data. And nothing here addresses the issue either. Your claim is that work ethic is less today or worse than it was in the past.

Click to expand...

Actually I didn't claim that. I just claimed that the problem with unemployment has a work ethic component. That should have been clear from the studies, especially the one of the Boston ghetto labor market (which is real data, not opinion). Now I know that work ethic is not the only problem resulting in high unemployment, but to say that it is not a problem is ignoring reality.

That's a hard thing to prove. Someone's opinion is not likely better than someone elses. And your states don't really address this issue.

Click to expand...

The Boston ghetto labor market study in the first link is data, not opinion.

Boo Radley said:

Someone's opinion is not likely better than someone elses.

Click to expand...

says the perpetual peddlar of petty opinions

who cites references to JON STEWART

LOL!

TurtleDude said:

that's really stupid and has no basis in fact

Click to expand...

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?

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...

You are referring to the Democrats as the "Party which does everything to make the rich richer and the poor poorer", right?

phattonez said:

Actually I didn't claim that. I just claimed that the problem with unemployment has a work ethic component. That should have been clear from the studies, especially the one of the Boston ghetto labor market (which is real data, not opinion). Now I know that work ethic is not the only problem resulting in high unemployment, but to say that it is not a problem is ignoring reality.

Click to expand...

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.

The Boston ghetto labor market study in the first link is data, not opinion.

Click to expand...

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