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 12-05-2013, 01:02 PM
 
Location: Calgary, AB
3,401 posts, read 1,835,907 times
Reputation: 1072

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by greywar View Post
OK so how do we make all citizens productive? magic fairy dust?
Roll back taxes to where they were 45 years ago and see to it that any company that wants to do business with or in North America will adhere to our occupational safety, industrial pollution, and wage standards. People are the same, it's the rules that have changed.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-05-2013, 01:03 PM
 
Location: Gulf Coast Texas
26,261 posts, read 14,140,123 times
Reputation: 10126
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ceece View Post
Income doesn't have to be equal (ie: we all get the same) it needs to be equalized more (ie: a handful of families don't hold 90% of the wealth). When too much is concentrated and horded at the top, which we are seeing now, it hurts everyone and gives way to much political power to people who've done nothing incredible to deserve it except be to be born to the right couple.
Then we need to change how people give to political groups.

Instead of income inequality - how about PAC donation inequality? Put a cap on what they can receive in a calendar year. That way they are on equal footing to campaign for their team.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-05-2013, 01:06 PM
 
Location: Great State of Texas
86,093 posts, read 69,987,095 times
Reputation: 27520
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ceece View Post
Income doesn't have to be equal (ie: we all get the same) it needs to be equalized more (ie: a handful of families don't hold 90% of the wealth). When too much is concentrated and horded at the top, which we are seeing now, it hurts everyone and gives way to much political power to people who've done nothing incredible to deserve it except be to be born to the right couple.
And that type of "rich" and that type of power exists in all forms of economies.

The rich will always be rich and protected no matter what form of government you have.
Money talks and poor people don't have money.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-05-2013, 01:13 PM
 
5,642 posts, read 2,133,001 times
Reputation: 2944
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ceece View Post
Income doesn't have to be equal (ie: we all get the same) it needs to be equalized more
OK, explain how then. If incomes simply MUST be "more equalized" so that 90% of the wealth of the nation is not concentrated in too few, please, give me the ballpark equalization parameters. By all means.

See, as a fan of free markets and the Invisible Hand, I know that I have no idea what any job should pay other than my own which I and my employer negotiated, so I don't need to suggest an "equalization" method. I accept income inequality because I accept supply and demand inequalities, and I was present the day they taught economics in Economics class.

But you are saying incomes must be equalized, so this puts the burden of at least a generalized plan on you. So please tell me HOW you will force this equalization.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-05-2013, 01:19 PM
 
Location: Great State of Texas
86,093 posts, read 69,987,095 times
Reputation: 27520
Quote:
Originally Posted by Volobjectitarian View Post
OK, explain how then. If incomes simply MUST be "more equalized" so that 90% of the wealth of the nation is not concentrated in too few, please, give me the ballpark equalization parameters. By all means.

See, as a fan of free markets and the Invisible Hand, I know that I have no idea what any job should pay other than my own which I and my employer negotiated, so I don't need to suggest an "equalization" method. I accept income inequality because I accept supply and demand inequalities, and I was present the day they taught economics in Economics class.

But you are saying incomes must be equalized, so this puts the burden of at least a generalized plan on you. So please tell me HOW you will force this equalization.
Turn communist is the only way I can figure.
What everyone seems to be crying for is communism.
Only they won't say that word.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-05-2013, 01:30 PM
 
38,040 posts, read 18,992,317 times
Reputation: 12097
Quote:
Originally Posted by DRob4JC View Post
Then we need to change how people give to political groups.

Instead of income inequality - how about PAC donation inequality? Put a cap on what they can receive in a calendar year. That way they are on equal footing to campaign for their team.
Yea I can vote for that. Whatever political party takes in more money must give the opposing party to even it up.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-05-2013, 01:33 PM
 
Location: OCEAN BREEZES AND VIEWS SAN CLEMENTE
19,899 posts, read 15,312,404 times
Reputation: 6451
Exacxtly take all the media hype away from his mess of a health care bill. Plain n simple, Obama, his administration, and anyone assocaited with this warp, lie of a health care bill, all lied for years. Plain n simple a liar is a liar, regardless who he is~ and those who cover up for him, are fooling no one, not even themsmelves.

Take a look at their lying faces some times,, so so obvious.

I have friends? who supported him who are now finding out, they cannot keep their current great health care that they have had for years. Premiums have skyrocked, and less benefits, how is this good. Tell me what are the advantages to these people, what is it, paying double and some triple preimums, with less quality care, how is this good to these people, how! Do you really think these people want to pay more, going to some different plan, think again.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-05-2013, 01:34 PM
 
30,920 posts, read 24,300,587 times
Reputation: 17818
Quote:
Originally Posted by Old Gringo View Post
But you conservos aren't too blind to get your panties in a wad when President Obama starts to make an issue of it, are you?

the problem is that obama doesnt want equal opportunities, he wants equal outcomes, he wants to make everyone equally poor, and that is why he is harping on "income inequality". and that my friend is one of the big tenets of marxism.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-05-2013, 01:34 PM
 
Location: Miami, FL
58,541 posts, read 31,944,414 times
Reputation: 9418
Quote:
Originally Posted by DRob4JC View Post
Obama: Income inequality becomes 'defining challenge'

President Barack Obama prodded Congress to raise wages and secure the social safety net as he issued an overarching appeal Wednesday to correct inequalities that he said make it harder for a child to escape poverty. "That should offend all of us," he declared. "We are a better country than this."

Focusing on the pocketbook issues that Americans consistently rank as a top concern, Obama argued that the dream of upward economic mobility is breaking down and that the growing income gap is a "defining challenge of our time."


According to the article, the Republicans responded...

House Speaker John Boehner blamed Senate Democrats and Obama for the lack of action on jobs-related legislation. He said bills passed by the Republican-controlled House that would help the economy and create jobs have been blocked in the Democratic-controlled Senate. "The Senate and the president continue to stand in the way of the people's priorities," he said on the House floor.


Somebody needs to argue the premise of solving income inequality. The Republican response is OK, I guess - but it doesn't attack the thinking that income inequality is the problem to be solved.

If the president wants equal income for all - have him define what that income is. Equal income could be $20,000 a year for all citizens. That would solve income inequality, right? Everyone assumes he means a nice livable income - let's say $75,000 per year. How do we get there with so many people out of work now? If you don't increase people working - then the only other option is redistribution. That's not right. Should I work to support two or three families - by government force? Should you?


So did Obama have any ideas to tackle the defining challenge of income inequality?

Though he offered no new initiatives, Obama blended a call for Congress to act on pending short-term economic measures with a long vision aimed at correcting a growing level of income inequality in the United States.

Nope. Nothing new here.

The article mentions typical liberal ideas - minimum wages from $7.25 to $10.10 - which will put more people out of work, and will put a larger burden on the employees to do the same amount of work with less people. In the end - it just shifting money around. We are not originating any new money organically.

Income inequality is the wrong problem to attack. We should be focused on making as many productive citizens as possible.
How could you possibly come out thinking that someone is asking for same income for everyone
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-05-2013, 01:39 PM
 
455 posts, read 734,298 times
Reputation: 631
I don't know how much of this does or does not already exist, but here are some thoughts of mine, whether they're trainwrecks or not. Still more ideas than Washington has:

- Federal Tax incentives for businesses that bring jobs back from overseas outsourcing, tax penalties for those that don't. Structure in a way that is financially advantageous for bringing it home.
- Federal Tax incentives for businesses to produce materials over importing materials, wherever possible. Tax incentives for new manufacturing plants to this end, simultaneously creating more jobs at home.
- State Tax incentives for businesses that give raises above a graduating, state-by-state threshold. The more money they give to their employees, the less they pay in corporate taxes, with an offset to incentivize the financial advantage of paying their employees more.

- State-run entry-level position placement program. Let's call it Jobs4Noobs as a placeholder. Basically, states would set up a program that provides tax incentives for businesses that hire newly grads in their particular field. Minimum period of employment set for full tax benefits, allowing newly grads to obtain much-needed work experience before either moving on or staying with the company. After entry-level period, salary should increase via the other incentive for paying more = paying less taxes.

- Low-income family educational incentives that tie into social benefits. Good benefits for those who have children in school, not dropping out, and graduating. Standard benefits for those that don't.

- Market technical college to more people. Financial aid is available for these degrees. You can get an associates degree with zero tuition. There is a long-term benefit for using state grant money to teach people a trade that will put them in good, skilled careers that turn around and benefit the economy and put more back into the tax base.

I could go on...
But, the entire idea here is to put more people in more jobs making more money. Not by mandate, but by incentive. These are the people that would be contributing the most to the economy. Not people who make the least money, pay the least taxes, or none at all. You can give a 10,000 dollar check to every person, every month, and it won't give anything back when that well runs dry.
And we cannot create jobs and higher earners by taxing business more, but we can create the incentive for them to do that on their own, and I guarantee it will benefit in the long term.

It's quite simple:
Make better wages and more jobs a profitable strategy for business. Or, at the very least, don't make it unprofitable for them. Which is exactly what the minimum wage crap would do.
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