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.
I've said it countless times; due to the drainage effect, growing inequality makes housing at all levels more expensive for everybody; I've even used real world examples
You are wrong. The rich pay a very small percentage of their income on housing. If people had more wealth they would spend more on housing
And according to Trump, Mitch and Paul those few at the top need more. Think about those poor billionaires.
Income inequality is a by product of a system that taxes labor more than capital. Personally, I think they should b be taxed the same and the preferential treatment on qualified dividends should be abolished. Maybe leave an exception for capital gains held more 2-3 years, which would probably help the market get long term folks back in
This has all been by design and carried out by the GOP that has morphed into an organized crime party and something will be done about this wealth transfer and funneling to the top. The donors and puppet masters are exposed as are their recipients and puppets. Ronald Raygun started this runaway train and a sociopath like Trump is the despicable result of this madness.
Income inequality is a by product of a system that taxes labor more than capital. Personally, I think they should b be taxed the same and the preferential treatment on qualified dividends should be abolished. Maybe leave an exception for capital gains held more 2-3 years, which would probably help the market get long term folks back in
Income inequality is caused by central banks manipulating and having a monopoly on currency.
In the last 40 years we have gone from 40 billionaires to almost 700 in the United States. Meanwhile wages have basically remained flat over that period of time. The concern has nothing to do with envy or jealousy but whether this is wise economic policy. More in particular that the 700 billionaires can influence policy to their advantage and do so. All the while the working class' buying power and saving capacity continues to dwindle and force more reliance on credit.
But by all means, conservatives need to pat themselves on the back for being "winners" like the billionaires and not losers like the 150 million who are lazy and all. LOL.
In the last 40 years we have gone from 40 billionaires to almost 700 in the United States. Meanwhile wages have basically remained flat over that period of time. The concern has nothing to do with envy or jealousy but whether this is wise economic policy. More in particular that the 700 billionaires can influence policy to their advantage and do so. All the while the working class' buying power and saving capacity continues to dwindle and force more reliance on credit.
But by all means, conservatives need to pat themselves on the back for being "winners" like the billionaires and not losers like the 150 million who are lazy and all. LOL.
This has all been by design and carried out by.....
Blah, blah, blah.
Inequality is not a problem.
Reducing income at the top doesn't help the bottom.
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.
