A long history of us wealth inequality

Very long history. In fact, since the beginning.

We overthrew a British King who was milking the "colonies" for his own personal benefit - and through him a clique of British families kissing-his-you-know-what for favors. (How do you think Pennsylvania got its name?)

Only to install a group of super-rich kinglets who started to amass riches in a boundless 18th-century dynamic fueled by the Industrial Age - and now repeating itself with the Information Age brought on by the Internet since the early 1990s.

And some people evidently think it's all been a natural historical progression. It isn't natural. Not with zero-taxation prior to and then unfair upper-income taxation schedules ever since 1913.

Without a just taxation schedule, we as a nation, have preprogramed our "democracy" for the Income Disparity that incarcerates 14% of our population below the Poverty Threshold. (That's the population of California and Mary land, btw.)

Graphic: US Wealth Inequality* (from Wealth Inequality in the United States)

The present is the moment to do something about America's arch inequality. It's NOW OR NEVER, because once social-sentiments become hardened into fact human history tells us clearly that only a bloody revolution changes the rules.

We are presently in a rampage of Wealth Generation brought about by the Internet. That Wealth Generation should be shared equitably, because we are all - willing or not - making it happen ...

*CBO Chart, U.S. Holdings of Family Wealth 1989 to 2013. The top 10% of families held 76% of the wealth in 2013, while the bottom 50% of families held 1%.

Lafayette said:

Very long history. In fact, since the beginning.

We overthrew a British King who was milking the "colonies" for his own personal benefit - and through him a clique of families kissing-his-you-know-what.

Only to install a group of super-rich kinglets who started to amass riches in a boundless 18th-century dynamic fueled by the Industrial Age - and now repeating itself with the Information Age brought on by the Internet since the early 1990s.

And some people evidently think it's all been a natural historical progression. It isn't natural. Not with unfair upper-income taxation schedules ever since 1913.

Without a just taxation schedule, we as a nation, have preprogramed our "democracy" for the Income Disparity that incarcerates 14% of our population below the Poverty Threshold. (That's the population of California and Mary land, btw.)

Graphic: US Wealth Inequality* (from Wealth Inequality in the United States)

Now is the moment to do something about America's arch inequality. It's NOW OR NEVER, because once social-sentiments become hardened into fact human history tells us clearly that only a bloody revolution changes the rules.

We are presently in a rampage of Wealth Generation brought about by the Internet. That Wealth Generation should be shared equitably, because we are all - willing or not - making it happen ...

*CBO Chart, U.S. Holdings of Family Wealth 1989 to 2013. The top 10% of families held 76% of the wealth in 2013, while the bottom 50% of families held 1%.

Click to expand...

What did you do to “make it happen?” What is your equitable share?

How many of those people in prison were convicted of a crime?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Lafayette said:

Very long history. In fact, since the beginning.

We overthrew a British King who was milking the "colonies" for his own personal benefit - and through him a clique of British families kissing-his-you-know-what for favors. (How do you think Pennsylvania got its name?)

Only to install a group of super-rich kinglets who started to amass riches in a boundless 18th-century dynamic fueled by the Industrial Age - and now repeating itself with the Information Age brought on by the Internet since the early 1990s.

And some people evidently think it's all been a natural historical progression. It isn't natural. Not with zero-taxation prior to and then unfair upper-income taxation schedules ever since 1913.

Without a just taxation schedule, we as a nation, have preprogramed our "democracy" for the Income Disparity that incarcerates 14% of our population below the Poverty Threshold. (That's the population of California and Mary land, btw.)

Graphic: US Wealth Inequality* (from Wealth Inequality in the United States)

The present is the moment to do something about America's arch inequality. It's NOW OR NEVER, because once social-sentiments become hardened into fact human history tells us clearly that only a bloody revolution changes the rules.

We are presently in a rampage of Wealth Generation brought about by the Internet. That Wealth Generation should be shared equitably, because we are all - willing or not - making it happen ...

*CBO Chart, U.S. Holdings of Family Wealth 1989 to 2013. The top 10% of families held 76% of the wealth in 2013, while the bottom 50% of families held 1%.

Click to expand...

I think the main difference is that in the old world order the privileged class was populated by only those who arrived there from birth.
In the US almost anyone can aspire and attain true wealth by being smart and working hard.
That is not all of the story, the real story is how well the middle class lives.
In my part of the Country (Texas) almost anyone can afford a house if they want one.
The cost of living is such that most people have a very nice lifestyle.
Achieving modest success is as easy is getting a decent college degree,
making yourself a resource at your place of employment,
and staying out of trouble. (managing your money helps a lot also.)

three rules i live by, and i have taught my kids, and am now teaching my grand kids

1. invest in yourself

2. spend less than you make

3. work like you own the place

i can expound on any of them, but they are pretty self explanatory....and have worked well for me and my family.

as far as the OP, it is hard to acquire wealth when you spend more than you make, and never invest...kinda cant work that way

Lafayette said:

Very long history. In fact, since the beginning.

...

The present is the moment to do something about America's arch inequality. It's NOW OR NEVER, because once social-sentiments become hardened into fact human history tells us clearly that only a bloody revolution changes the rules.

We are presently in a rampage of Wealth Generation brought about by the Internet. That Wealth Generation should be shared equitably, because we are all - willing or not - making it happen ...

Click to expand...

The real issue at hand, that people rarely want to talk about, is a proposal for an economic model that *does not* produce a wealth based aristocracy, a government based aristocracy, or some terrible combination of the two.

Even in our present mixed economic model we ended up with both, and that result is similar to enough western economic and government models to suggest that sliding the scale leaning market or planned does not really change the result near enough.

Worse, those that complain about this rarely have a good idea on what to do about it without it being the tried and failed for the umpteenth time "tax more" approach... that ends up increasing reliance on a government model resulting in a government based aristocracy.

With each passing generation we can pretend we are doing something about wealth inequality but the results have been less than ideal. We have a massive government model, we have a convoluted economic model with dependencies on fragile conditions (like consumer debt, real estate debt, central banking policy, cheap foreign products and services, etc.,) and ultimately an aristocratic leaning set of leaders both left and right with far more investment in themselves than a result for some social or economic (or both) fault.

In economic terms "shared equitably" can be plotted out on a whiteboard in a classroom using classroom thinking, but in application we tend to see reaction to governmental influences in economic matters were we still end up with wealth accumulation. So it makes trying to share equitably a moving target with so many factors we end up lost in the ideology of fairness but result in a majority of the population being slaves to an economic model, a government model, or in our case... both.

gdgyva said:

three rules i live by, and i have taught my kids, and am now teaching my grand kids

1. invest in yourself

2. spend less than you make

3. work like you own the place

i can expound on any of them, but they are pretty self explanatory....and have worked well for me and my family.

as far as the OP, it is hard to acquire wealth when you spend more than you make, and never invest...kinda cant work that way

Click to expand...

Those are three good ones.

I'd throw in the idea of accumulating transferable skills but that would be 4 and 3 is cleaner.

longview said:

I think the main difference is that in the old world order the privileged class was populated by only those who arrived there from birth.

Click to expand...

True enough, the world order in the Agricultural Age was determined by who owned the land. Many, many wars were all about just that. You fought for your King, and if you survived he gave a great deal of land that you then parceled out ignorant farmers who lived off it and also made you a handsome fortune. (And if they stole from you, you strung them up for all to see as a lesson.)

longview said:

In the US almost anyone can aspire and attain true wealth by being smart and working hard.

Click to expand...

Well, that's not necessarily true. So much Wealth is being passed along, that we are simply recreating exactly the same hereditary standing that existed during the Agricultural Age (when it was the land - which made the fortune - that was inherited).

Do you think Ivanka is ever going to worry about from where her next Merc is coming?

longview said:

That is not all of the story, the real story is how well the middle class lives .... Achieving modest success is as easy is getting a decent college degree, making yourself a resource at your place of employment,nand staying out of trouble.

Click to expand...

You make it sound like a piece-a-cake. But it isn't.

Only 45% of the kids who start a post-secondary degree course end up with it. What are the other 55% to do? Get a job that pays the rent that sustains the mortgage on the houses that upper-income family kids are renting to them?

These lower-income people have only rudimentary talents that have already been rubbished because of manufacturing that has long-since high-tailed it to China. So, what do they do to earn a living?

They are the 50Percenters of the population who are living below the median national-income in the US. Which is just below $60K (according to the numbers linked above). And of those, 15% are living below the Poverty Threshold of $25K/year (for a family of four).

Here is the National Household Income Distribution Graphic for the US:
*If I count the percentage of the population living below the Poverty Threshold, it amounts to 23.4%.
*If I add the percentages of those living below the Median Income level ($50K), the total percentage amounts to 47%

Everybody else lives on an income above the median $50K/year; that is, 53% of all households.

My Point:
*I am a bit surprised at the numbers because the Census Bureau says that only 14% of the population lives below the Poverty Threshold (of $24K/year income for a family of four). Above, the number is closer to 23%. (But, also, stats depend upon how you count them. The Census Bureau does so from direct interviews with households. The above numbers were obtained, I think, from the IRS.)
*Regardless, whether 14% or 23%, the numbers of fellow Americans living below the Poverty Threshold is astounding for a nation as rich as ours.
*And so, in terms of National Policy, what are we doing about it?
*Nada, nothing, zip.

What could we be doing about the unfairness? This:
*We are in the midst of Age Change (from the Industrial to the Information Age). We could tax more Upper-incomes (especially above $100K earnings per year).
*With the enhanced upper-income taxation (and instead of spending it on the DoD, which swallows whole a bit less than 50% of our National Discretionary-Spending Budget) we could offer all American children below the family annual income level of $50K a free post-secondary education at their state-school ... !

AliHajiSheik said:

What did you do to “make it happen?” What is your equitable share?

Click to expand...

Easy as pie. Raise upper income taxation progressively back to where it was before JFK lowered it in the early 1960s. That is, above 90%. (And reduce drastically all the escape loop-holes!)

AliHajiSheik said:

How many of those people in prison were convicted of a crime?

Click to expand...

All them I should hope!

What we do know is that roughly 68% of those criminally incarcerated have no high-school diploma!*

Dontcha think we should start there? I do ...

*Statistic from here.

Lafayette said:

Easy as pie. Raise upper income taxation progressively back to where it was before JFK lowered it in the early 1960s. That is, above 90%. (And reduce drastically all the escape loop-holes!)



All them I should hope!

What we do know is that roughly 68% of those criminally incarcerated have no high-school diploma!*

Dontcha think we should start there? I do ...

*Statistic from here.

Click to expand...

You didn't respond to my question: "What did you do to make it happen?" This was your statement: That Wealth Generation should be shared equitably, because we are all - willing or not - making it happen ...

Are you even aware of what the tax brackets were in 1961? Greater than $6,000/year was a 30% tax rate, the masses are going to live your advocacy.

I would start with people graduating high school before they begin their life of crime, it would certainly help your statistic.

AliHajiSheik said:

Are you even aware of what the tax brackets were in 1961? Greater than $6,000/year was a 30% tax rate, the masses are going to live your advocacy.
.

Click to expand...

Are you? Have a gander here:





And here:



COMPARATIVELY, THE U.S. IS INCOME TAX-HEAVEN FOR UPPER INCOME EARNERS ...

Lafayette said:

Are you? Have a gander here:

And here:

COMPARATIVELY, THE U.S. IS INCOME TAX-HEAVEN FOR UPPER INCOME EARNERS ...

Click to expand...

So the answer is NO, you don't know what the tax brackets were in 1961. I wouldn't have asked you and referenced one sample tax bracket, of which there were dozens, if I hadn't already looked it up. Posting 2015 isn't relevant to my point, but as long as you brought it up, 1961 tax rates would be even less progressive.

There is power in ignorance, use your power wisely.