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.
Democrats like portraying Republicans as the greedy money grubbers but the statistics and reality do not back this delusion up at all.
If you are a diehard Dem please explain your rationale for blaming Republicans for the income gap and why it has been increasing at a high rate since Democrats have largely been in control for the past 60 years.
Democrats like portraying Republicans as the greedy money grubbers but the statistics and reality do not back this delusion up at all.
If you are a diehard Dem please explain your rationale for blaming Republicans for the income gap and why it has been increasing at a high rate since Democrats have largely been in control for the past 60 years.
Thanks for clearing this up for me.
You are wasting your breath. Anyone who is rich on the blue side of the line gets an automatic nod and wink. It wouldn't matter if he/she owned the entire world, as long as he/she had blue hair growing on his/her back.
I don't agree that the Dems have been "largely been in control" for 60 years.
Income and wealth inequality started to take off in the 1980's. The largest factor has been the decline of union membership. CEO and board pay exploded from 10x average workers pay to over 200x. Corporate CEO and BOD have gotten a lot better at keeping wages down and extracting more money out of the company for themselves. If you want to blame a politician it would be Reagan for starting the movement to weaken and undermine unions.
You are wasting your breath. Anyone who is rich on the blue side of the line gets an automatic nod and wink. It wouldn't matter if he/she owned the entire world, as long as he/she had blue hair growing on his/her back.
No, not really. This doesn't excite me. And the red and blue color thing is a crock of garbage. That states are red or blue is nonsense and a propaganda tactic made up by liberals. The majority of 'red' states are historically democrat. Democrats are always buying and selling propaganda, it is what they do.
Democrats like portraying Republicans as the greedy money grubbers but the statistics and reality do not back this delusion up at all.
If you are a diehard Dem please explain your rationale for blaming Republicans for the income gap and why it has been increasing at a high rate since Democrats have largely been in control for the past 60 years.
Thanks for clearing this up for me.
The Democratic party slowly shifted from being a pro-labor party to a neoliberal party.
I don't agree that the Dems have been "largely been in control" for 60 years.
Income and wealth inequality started to take off in the 1980's. The largest factor has been the decline of union membership. CEO and board pay exploded from 10x average workers pay to over 200x. Corporate CEO and BOD have gotten a lot better at keeping wages down and extracting more money out of the company for themselves. If you want to blame a politician it would be Reagan for starting the movement to weaken and undermine unions.
'Unions' are merely a form of slavery in a labor context.. Not buying your propaganda.
I don't agree that the Dems have been "largely been in control" for 60 years.
Income and wealth inequality started to take off in the 1980's. The largest factor has been the decline of union membership. CEO and board pay exploded from 10x average workers pay to over 200x. Corporate CEO and BOD have gotten a lot better at keeping wages down and extracting more money out of the company for themselves. If you want to blame a politician it would be Reagan for starting the movement to weaken and undermine unions.
Quote:
Originally Posted by skepticratic
The Democratic party slowly shifted from being a pro-labor party to a neoliberal party.
I agree, to an extent, with both of these posts. I do have a question for you, skepticratic: if the Democrats were to come out more strongly pro-labor than you feel they are now, would you support them?
I agree, to an extent, with both of these posts. I do have a question for you, skepticratic: if the Democrats were to come out more strongly pro-labor than you feel they are now, would you support them?
I'm not sure what supporting a party means. And being pro-labor doesn't necessarily mean I'd support them because pro-labor can mean a lot of things. More than anything, my big concerns with economic policy are giving people the ability to connect with their work. The Democrats have more potential to do that than the Republicans, I feel, though as is, I already vote Democrat more than I vote Republican. Current, I'm registered as a Democrat, though in fairness, this is only a nominal allegiance.
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.
