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.
No, it's not. Inequality has nothing do do with what working people make.
i don't know how in the world you figure that "income inequality" has nothing to do with what working people make
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roadking2003
Dream on. When George Sorors increases his billions it has no impact on me. The only exception is when people like Al Gore reap their billions by adding to the cost of living for the rest of us.
when more dollars exist in circulation, it increases costs.
if the supply of dollars increases, but your quantity of dollars remains constant, then your purchasing power (by definition) declines.
That's if you think income is finite. Which it is not.
income is finite. No person or organization has infinite income.
Quote:
But, to agree somewhat with your claim - when that top 1% are the cronies of elected officials, and are rewarded with taxpayer dollars, it DOES erode the purchasing power of the taxpayer, since they would have more money in their pocket if their taxes were lower.
whether the top 1% are utilizing taxpayer dollars , or not, is irrelevant in the inflation calculation.
private sector debt creates new currency just like public sector debt.
Dream on. When George Sorors increases his billions it has no impact on me. The only exception is when people like Al Gore reap their billions by adding to the cost of living for the rest of us.
when the supply of circulating currency increases, like we're talking about, it causes an erosion of purchasing power.
in this context, as long as income for the mid/lower classes is stagnant, then income inequality is functionally equivalent to a loss of purchasing power.
i don't know how in the world you figure that "income inequality" has nothing to do with what working people make
when more dollars exist in circulation, it increases costs.
if the supply of dollars increases, but your quantity of dollars remains constant, then your purchasing power (by definition) declines.
True-
However, George Soros (as well as other wealthy people) do not print or determine the money supply.
1. money is created by the Fed at the behest of the Treasury
2. "digital money" is created when banks maintain 10% of deposits and loan the rest, expanding the money supply.
Wealth is not a "zero sum game" (despite what liberals think). If someone is rich, that does not make someone else poor. Do you really think that Bill Gates, through developing Microsoft, caused thousands of people to be poor? Did the innovations of Edison (which made him wealthy) cause millions to be poor?
Last edited by hawkeye2009; 01-09-2014 at 08:59 AM..
Obama has recently said that income inequality is the big issue of the modern age (Funny, I thought it was health care reform. What ever happened to that? )
New York mayor de Blasio says his first priority will be addressing income inequality.
So: How will we know they've achieved their stated goals? When there's income "equality"?
What is income 'equality'?
Obviously the libs mean egalitarianism, where government steps in to create equality in a world where it does not exist, by taking from the industrious, hard working people, and giving to the lazy couch potato, and the dysfunctional.
i don't know how in the world you figure that "income inequality" has nothing to do with what working people make
.
You can reduce income inequality by reducing the top. That does not benefit the bottom. If you tell George Soros he can only make a million dollars, then he has to stop working, that will not benefit anybody. That does not raise the buying power of somebody working part time. That does not raise the buying power of the plumber working 60 hours per week.
Or you can reduce income inequality by improving the bottom. The fastest way to do that is jobs. Most poor people don't work full time, or have less than one full time job per family. Jobs is the way to improve lower income people's standard of living.
But in any event, the equality is immaterial. Increasing the buying power of the lower income bracket that is important.
However, George Soros (as well as other wealthy people) do not print or determine the money supply.
1. money is created by the Fed at the behest of the Treasury
2. "digital money" is created when banks maintain 10% of deposits and loan the rest, expanding the money supply.
We can blame banks for causing inflation?
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.
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.
)
