U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 10-10-2011, 02:42 PM
 
Location: NJ
16,022 posts, read 11,061,949 times
Reputation: 10214

Advertisements

There are institutional problems created by both parties over the decades. The issue we now face is a socialist agenda which would replace the core of American ideology.

There can be no compromise in this crisis of historical proportion. Obama will not compromise and the repubs shouldn't. Anything that appears as compromise is political shorthand to garner public support.

One would hope the remaining Dems and Reps would ban together to defeat the the hijacked Dem party headed by Obama handlers.

The mood is now ripe, once we dump Obama, et al to really make progress in restructuring the federal government policies and not re-electing the career politicians who ensured this looming disaster.

Household income is almost an irrelevant issue in proportion to the larger evidence that declares Obama the primary cause of an exacerbated, accelerated economic disaster. Who cares if some creative statistician twists the numbers one way or the other.....open your eyes to see the real evidence that requires no P values, statistical significance or confidence levels.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-10-2011, 03:59 PM
 
Location: Ohio
18,160 posts, read 13,345,222 times
Reputation: 14053
Quote:
Originally Posted by jojajn View Post
Income disparity is certainly a problem.
Why? Says who? There's no law that says income has to look like a beautiful bell-shaped curve.

How many of those earning more than $1 Million are sports figures or entertainers?

In 2008 there were only 232,000 that had an adjusted gross income of more than $1 Million.

Quote:
Contracts for college coaches cover more than salariesBy Jodi Upton and Steve Wieberg, USA TODAY
Pick any numbers you like to define college football's premier teams — points scored, yards allowed.
Or the big money earned by their coaches.
The sport's dizzying salaries spiral has come to this, a USA TODAY study finds: The million-dollar coach, once a rarity, is now the norm. Head coaches at the NCAA's top-level schools are making an average of $950,000 this year, not counting benefits, incentives, subsidized housing or any of the perks they routinely receive. At least 42 of the 119 Division I-A coaches are earning $1 million or more this year, up from five in 1999.
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/colle...es-cover_x.htm

Here's a story on 10 sports stars in the US who earn more than $20 Million per year.

15 Highest Pro Athlete Salaries of 2011 | Total Pro Sports

Here's a story on 50 US athletes that earn more than $1 Million per year:

2011 Fortunate 50 - SI.com

A little note. Um, the lowest paid gets $15.5 Million per year.

All 50 together earn...(drum-roll please)

....$1.213 Billion per year.

And from where do they get that money?

Um, gosh, that would be from the 99% who voluntarily give their money away then whine like small child that they don't have any money.

You want snivel about income disparity, then cancel the premium cable sports package for starters.

These are the Top 40 Hollywood:

Hollywood’s Highest Paid Stars 2011 – Highest Paid Actors ‹ The Richest People In The World 2011

All 40 together earned...(drum-roll please)

...$1.361 Billion in 2010.

Where do you think they get that money?

From the 99%.

Maybe they should cancel their subscriptions to HBO and NetFlix.


Quote:
Originally Posted by jojajn View Post
The wealthy (I mean job creators ) are certainly not realizing a declining income.
That's because the 99% keep handing it to them.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-10-2011, 04:02 PM
 
19,503 posts, read 13,271,259 times
Reputation: 4890
Quote:
Originally Posted by MTAtech View Post
While the righties blame lower income on Obama, it's clear it predates Obama. It should be no surprise that in bad economic times, median income falls:
When they fall at the mind numbing rate they have been falling under 0bama, it becomes historic. 0bama is truly that - "historic".
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-10-2011, 04:10 PM
 
19,503 posts, read 13,271,259 times
Reputation: 4890
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eleanora1 View Post
The basic problem is that the Reps suck at this as well. Both parties are in league with big business to screw over the middle and working classes. No Republican or Dem cares about most Americans. The Reps think they can win over the lower classes with cultish anti-science religious nonsense that attacks reproductive rights and assigns women to roles as breeders and nothing more. The Dems think they can win over the lower classes by supporting the economic desires of Mexicans and pandering to Muslims.

I see no reason to take Republican seriously on this issue. They've given no indication they care about the strains most middle class people face. It's like listening to them talk about reproductive rights or the environment. They have no credibility at all.
No sign? Did you not see all the republicans that we kicked out of office, by refusing to reelect them in 2003 and 2007? Those elections gave the dems control of both the house and senate for 0bama's first two years. We will finish trying to clean out the repugs in 2012, along with a lot more spend happy democrats.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-10-2011, 04:12 PM
 
19,503 posts, read 13,271,259 times
Reputation: 4890
Quote:
Originally Posted by momonkey View Post
A lot of people in government back in the 1990s suffered from a disease called hubris, and their arrogance and stupidity lead to the crash in 2007-2008
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-10-2011, 04:17 PM
 
19,503 posts, read 13,271,259 times
Reputation: 4890
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cletus Awreetus-Awrightus View Post
the biggest was the SEC Net capital rule of 2004, which allowed the banks to increase their capital ratios to unsafe levels.*

The FRC that Bush appointed, Alan Greenspan, kept rates too low from 2001-2005.

additionally, Bush's OTS and OCC preempted state predatory lending laws.

Bush's OTS was supposed to be regulating AIG's Credit Default Swaps and Derivatives trading; of course, they didn't, since Bush believed that banks could regulate themselves.


* -- here's a great quote from that article on the SEC Net Capital rule:
A lot of things started to unravel after repealing Glass-Steagall, and signing Gramm–Leach–Bliley, and bush was advised poorly, just as Clinton was. Neither president knew what the hell they were doing, but it all started under Clinton.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-10-2011, 05:43 PM
 
Location: Long Island, NY
19,712 posts, read 11,084,277 times
Reputation: 5600
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kracer View Post
There are institutional problems created by both parties over the decades. The issue we now face is a socialist agenda which would replace the core of American ideology.
Can you provide any examples of this "socialist agenda?" From where I sit, Obama has conceded everything to the Republicans. On health care, what his bill ended up becoming is what the Republicans proposed in 1993 as an alternative to Bill Clinton's H C proposal; On taxes, we still have the same rates that were lowered by Bush and the modest rate increases on the rich that Obama proposes are lower than under Reagan. It's laughable to consider those 'Socialism.' So what, exactly, is this "socialist agenda?" Please give examples.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-10-2011, 06:03 PM
 
Location: Long Island, NY
19,712 posts, read 11,084,277 times
Reputation: 5600
Quote:
Originally Posted by MTAtech
While the righties blame lower income on Obama, it's clear it predates Obama. It should be no surprise that in bad economic times, median income falls:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wapasha View Post
When they fall at the mind numbing rate they have been falling under 0bama, it becomes historic. 0bama is truly that - "historic".
If you notice, the sharp decline started prior to 2009. It continued on the same slope. Also notice that it continues through Jan. 2009. Yes, Obama was inaugurated in January but did not pass any policy legislation, clearly indicating that no Obama policy was casual to this fall and assigning blame to Obama is misdirected (and done for purely [false] political reasons.)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-10-2011, 08:50 PM
 
Location: Chicagoland
41,314 posts, read 38,611,481 times
Reputation: 7106
Quote:
Originally Posted by MTAtech View Post
If you notice, the sharp decline started prior to 2009. It continued on the same slope. Also notice that it continues through Jan. 2009. Yes, Obama was inaugurated in January but did not pass any policy legislation, clearly indicating that no Obama policy was casual to this fall and assigning blame to Obama is misdirected (and done for purely [false] political reasons.)
Sorry, but the precipitous DROP in that chart takes place in mid 2009 and obama and the dems were in charge of the whole thing at the time.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-10-2011, 09:17 PM
 
Location: Long Island, NY
19,712 posts, read 11,084,277 times
Reputation: 5600
Quote:
Originally Posted by sanrene View Post
Sorry, but the precipitous DROP in that chart takes place in mid 2009 and obama and the dems were in charge of the whole thing at the time.
Then you need to return to 6th grade, as you can't read a graph. The drop started in the fourth quarter of 2008 and the same slope continued through 2009. The fact that it started in 2008 is clear indication that it had nothing to do with Obama's policies.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top