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)
View Poll Results: What Administration is most responsible for Income Inequality?
Politicians in DC and thier policies are actually not responsible for the shape of this country, it's a strawman and is up to the individual. 5 10.20%
Politicians in DC are responsible but are blameless when they rejoin back into a large corporation or bank. 2 4.08%
Puppet Barack Obama and Wall Street since QE and Bailouts occured on his watch. 22 44.90%
Ronald Reagan and Trickle Down Economics Policies. 24 48.98%
I don't care and this topic needs to die since my stocks are going through the roof. 3 6.12%
Multiple Choice Poll. Voters: 49. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 12-06-2013, 07:51 AM
 
Location: NE Ohio
30,120 posts, read 15,680,828 times
Reputation: 8799

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by theunbrainwashed View Post
This is the problem with hyperpartisans like yourself. Just because someone is a Democrat, doesn't mean they are stupid. Teapublicans don't have a monopoly on "common sense"
If being anti-Progressive is "hyperpartisan," I'll wear the lable. I don't see it that way, however. The ideology of the left isn't something that makes compromise possible. The difference between Marxist/socialism and constitutional, limited government, along with capitalism can not be reconciled. It is just too great a divide. One is the complete opposite of the other.

Many people came to America to escape the oppression of socialism.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-06-2013, 07:58 AM
 
Location: The Republic of Texas
60,422 posts, read 30,688,107 times
Reputation: 12871
Quote:
Originally Posted by hawkeye2009 View Post
None of the above-

It should be the Wilson administration, as they instituted

The Federal Reserve
Income tax


I totally agree!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-06-2013, 08:03 AM
 
4,414 posts, read 3,225,331 times
Reputation: 2319
Quote:
Originally Posted by le roi View Post
it is a question of degrees of equality
I realize that, but calling it "income inequality" is too simplistic and offers a distraction from the very real problem of wage stagnation. That is blatantly clear here on CD where the herr derr crowd has latched on the word "equality" and (purposefully?) conflated it with communism and redistribution; All the while blind to the fact that we've been redistributing wealth from the bottom up for the past 30 years.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-06-2013, 08:05 AM
 
30,909 posts, read 24,262,066 times
Reputation: 17805
Quote:
Originally Posted by Finn_Jarber View Post
Yes, they do, as long as they have the basic tools like basic education. If you cannot succeed with collage education, then you have only yourself to blame.
the problem though is that the federal government is the one that is dumbing down the public education in this country. this is why the feds need to stay out of things that should be a state issue, because the one size fits all approach that the feds take just doesnt work. back before the department of education was elevated to a cabinet level post, the feds just oversaw the work the states did, and didnt interfere. now the feds are essentially running the education departments for the states, and our children are the ones that suffer the consequences. drop the department of education from the cabinet level, and put it back where it was as a small department with some oversight that set the standards, and let the states get back to the job of teaching the children.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-06-2013, 08:21 AM
 
Location: Miami, FL
58,519 posts, read 31,909,570 times
Reputation: 9412
Quote:
Originally Posted by rbohm View Post
the problem though is that the federal government is the one that is dumbing down the public education in this country. this is why the feds need to stay out of things that should be a state issue, because the one size fits all approach that the feds take just doesnt work. back before the department of education was elevated to a cabinet level post, the feds just oversaw the work the states did, and didnt interfere. now the feds are essentially running the education departments for the states, and our children are the ones that suffer the consequences. drop the department of education from the cabinet level, and put it back where it was as a small department with some oversight that set the standards, and let the states get back to the job of teaching the children.
Sounds like you are simply hoping that if we do something, anything, then the problem will disappear.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-06-2013, 08:55 AM
 
5,182 posts, read 2,351,963 times
Reputation: 1856
Income Inequality in itself is not bad. The OP was about the INCREASE in Income Inequality beyond the standard norm throughout our countries history.

I think the problem is the financialization of every aspect of our economy so that Wall Street gets a cut out of the productivity and profits of everyone involved.

It is also those in the top .5% that have also benefited greatly from this and made almost all their wealth through Wall Street.

An Investment Manager's View on the Top 1%

http://www2.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica...t_manager.html

Quote:
The Upper Half of the Top 1%

Membership in this elite group is likely to come from being involved in some aspect of the financial services or banking industry, real estate development involved with those industries, or government contracting. Some hard working and clever physicians and attorneys can acquire as much as $15M-$20M before retirement but they are rare. Those in the top 0.5% have incomes over $500k if working and a net worth over $1.8M if retired. The higher we go up into the top 0.5% the more likely it is that their wealth is in some way tied to the investment industry and borrowed money than from personally selling goods or services or labor as do most in the bottom 99.5%. They are much more likely to have built their net worth from stock options and capital gains in stocks and real estate and private business sales, not from income which is taxed at a much higher rate. These opportunities are largely unavailable to the bottom 99.5%.
There were many small mom and pops, and small and medium business that were never involved in the stock market, but many of them have been dieing out, giving more market share to the Wall Street Connected Companies.

The centralization of power and wealth via the public or private sector, and especially when they are both in bed together never ends well.

It is a good idea when the power of government is spread throughout the country via local and regional governments and not all centered in DC where corrupt men hold the reins over the country and cater to those that put them in power instead of the best interest of the nation.

Likewise, this country did better when the power and wealth of business was spread throughout the country and not concentrated in multinational conglomerates. It is still capitalism when the wealth of the nation is distributed throughout the country via small and medium business.

It is not however capitalism when they get big enough to buy politicians to serve them at the expense to the rest of the nation. That would be corporate fascism.

How do people that complain about Big Government reconcile their views when it comes to Business also becoming Big enough to hijack our Government?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-08-2014, 09:26 PM
 
1 posts, read 370 times
Reputation: 10
I wonder why we consistently ignore the fact that vast amounts of corporations have either moved their corporations overseas to take advantage of third world workers or used technology to displace workers. There is no question they are doing what is in their interest (the corporations), but to ignore the fact that it reduces the amount of needed labor in any OECD country is naive. To argue that people need to work harder dismisses that the amount of available jobs have shrunk. In fact, according to David Mcafee from MIT the amount of jobs available in 2000 was more than the amount of jobs in 2010. You can blame the government because they added Obama care in the last couple, but that really is choosing not to look at the data. That is a recent phenomena. The reality in this country is that there are less good paying jobs and more and more of us have to compete to get them. Yes it is hard and the people who want them have to work hard, but it does not mean that those that don't get them are lazy. If there are less jobs for more people then there is a different problem, and that is what we should be discussing.

Additionally, to dismiss the growing inequality gap in this country is also dismissing the data. Automation and computers continue to replace regular workers due to technological advancement. That is happening. It doesn't mean technology is bad, but to dismiss it's effect is to ignore reality. To also dismiss the fact the people who set up the laws that allowed offshoring with no consequence whatsoever, is to also dismiss a real effect. You can make an argument that you like cheap stuff, and I won't disagree. The question becomes what is the long term effect of taking the benefit of the cheap stuff for a lack of opportunity for the masses to find well paying jobs.

The two issues that we have is 1. how lawmakers have allowed corporations to force american or OECD country workers to compete directly with third world workers with no consequence forcing them to consider the lowering of their expected lifestyles to get jobs and 2. the fact that corporations find purchasing automation equipment to do the work of workers not only in factories but in commercial retail (grocery stores, fast food [on it's way], internet shopping, etc..) has simply required companies to need less people to accomplish their goals.

These two basic issues automatically create a situation where less money is shared with average workers. You can say that is progress, and I won't dispute it. But to deny that there are less well paying jobs in this country and almost everywhere that has achieved some basic policy designed to sustain the environment or protect people from exploitation is simply not true.

The real question we have to ask is not who is to blame or whether it exists. It is how do we manage to create new solutions to these problems that allow progress both technologically and on a human experience level to progress.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-08-2014, 09:59 PM
 
Location: The Republic of Texas
60,422 posts, read 30,688,107 times
Reputation: 12871
Look at what happens if you try and save money today.... It is futile.

By the time you save $10,000, it has the buying power of $1000 when you started saving.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-08-2014, 10:03 PM
 
24,843 posts, read 31,277,697 times
Reputation: 11428
Stop blaming anyone.....if you need more money......go make more money.....make all you want.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-08-2014, 10:05 PM
 
24,843 posts, read 31,277,697 times
Reputation: 11428
Quote:
Originally Posted by BentBow View Post
Look at what happens if you try and save money today.... It is futile.

By the time you save $10,000, it has the buying power of $1000 when you started saving.
I somewhat agree.....that is why I buy a lot of equipment.

The depreciation on our income tax is a good off set.
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