U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Covid-19 Information Page
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
 [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 11-16-2007, 05:41 AM
 
Location: North Texas
384 posts, read 893,670 times
Reputation: 262

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by davidt1 View Post
I just read a report of a study done by the Department of Agriculture in the LA Times today. According to this study, 35.5 million people in this country went hungry in 2006. Take a moment to think about that. Any curious person has to wonder how can that happen in the most powerful and prosperous nation on earth. I am sure there are some years the rich don't make as many millions or billions as they did the year before. I am also pretty sure the 35.5 million people who went hungry in 2006 didn't much make much at all.
What does that mean; "went hungry"?
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-16-2007, 08:23 AM
 
3,763 posts, read 11,370,016 times
Reputation: 6787
Most of the talk about the growing income inequity gap has happened during the Bush administration, i.e. after 1996. Clinton's policies did alot to redistribute wealth.. (whatever else you think about him)..

It is NOW, 2007, that they're talking about when they talk about the rich getting richer, and the new "Golden Age"... and right now, there's little on the horizon to change that for the immediate future
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-16-2007, 08:54 AM
 
5,413 posts, read 10,364,076 times
Reputation: 4503
Quote:
Originally Posted by expgc View Post
What does that mean; "went hungry"?
Yep. There are liars on every level of this game.

And the Lie method is used because folks do not tend to track exactly what is being is said or not said.

Just like cdelena does not track the difference between rich/wealth and income. Actually no direct relationship between wealth and income at all, but for the targets of such a lie -- the middle -- as their earned income is related related to their wealth -- the mindset allows the mis-representation of the top end.

Now of course the Wall Street Journal editiors are competent enough to know the difference.

And like you say things get foggy on the bottom, as well. Just what does "went hungry" mean anyway? And the even sadder truth is that what (some) folks on the bottom waste on beer, cigarettes, and the lottery, could feed a whole huge chunk other foks (generally family) of the hungry folks on the bottom.

Rather than a new Gilded Age, I am thinking the whole ReaganBushClintonBush Era will be known as the Age of the Lie. It permeates everything at every level.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-16-2007, 09:43 AM
 
5,348 posts, read 8,902,830 times
Reputation: 7680
Quote:
Originally Posted by expgc View Post
What does that mean; "went hungry"?
Here is what the rest the article said:

"The figure represented more than 1 in 10 people or 12.1%, who said they did not have enough money or resources to get food for at least some period during the year, according to the annual hunger survey."

You can go to any shelter in any major city and see the people who go hungry. There are folks who have a place to live or even own a home, but are a few paychecks away from being homeless. All it takes is a job loss or medical problem for people to from home owner to homeless and hungry. Many times natural disasters can leave people homeless and hungry, at least temporarily, as in the case of the recent San Diego fires. Other times such disasters will make people homeless and hungry semi-permanently, as in the Katrina flooding.

Last edited by davidt1; 11-16-2007 at 09:52 AM..
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-16-2007, 10:24 AM
 
3,698 posts, read 10,592,154 times
Reputation: 2620
Quote:
Originally Posted by expgc View Post
What does that mean; "went hungry"?
They couldn't Supersize.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-16-2007, 11:50 AM
 
Location: Wherabouts Unknown!
7,805 posts, read 17,598,864 times
Reputation: 9435
Default The way of the world.

cdelena wrote:
Just shows that people will believe what they want... the facts don't really count.
It's been that way throughtout my lifetime, and I imagine that was the case waaaaaay before I was born. I think that people know intuitively that facts are just a slice of reality observed in a certain way, presented to prove a point. If a person has a different perception of reality, facts obtained from a perception outside their own, carry little weight. That seems to be the way of the world.

blessings...Franco
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-16-2007, 03:54 PM
 
Location: in drifts of snow wherever you go
2,493 posts, read 3,653,950 times
Reputation: 692
Quote:
Originally Posted by expgc View Post
What does that mean; "went hungry"?
It means they missed their late-morning meal, which comes sometime after breakfast and before lunch.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-16-2007, 08:33 PM
 
Location: Forests of Maine
32,557 posts, read 53,021,306 times
Reputation: 22412
Quote:
Originally Posted by celena View Post
Statistics do not support the ‘rich get richer and the poor get poorer’ tag line.

A Treasury study examined a large sample of 96,700 income tax returns ...
Tax returns show AGI.

Tax returns do not show Net Worth.

Any 'wealthy' person worth his salt will have a tax return with a very low AGI, or a zero AGI.

Some 'uber-wealthy' will allow their AGI to be a little up there, just so that the media does not get so much mileage from the idea that they are not paying so much taxes.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-16-2007, 08:48 PM
 
28,718 posts, read 42,644,516 times
Reputation: 37654
Quote:
Originally Posted by sean98125 View Post
That bit about the poorest income group ignores the fact that Bush created a new 10% tax bracket at the lowest end in 2001. Many taxpayers who had previously been in the lowest tax bracket were now in the next higher tax bracket, even though their income didn't change.

Actually their income did change. For the worse. After paying that higher tax that Bushie dumped on them their income was less than before.

OP -

Here's a "poor rich people" comparison for you: Using "percentage magic"

Rich Man: "My income dropped 35% this year!. I only earned 10.5 million dollars! I'm so poor I'll have to sell my third house in Hawaii."

Poor Man: "My income went up 1000 percent this year! I now earn $90,000! I'm rich!"
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-16-2007, 10:24 PM
 
Location: Forests of Maine
32,557 posts, read 53,021,306 times
Reputation: 22412
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tek_Freek View Post
Actually their income did change. For the worse. After paying that higher tax that Bushie dumped on them their income was less than before.

OP -

Here's a "poor rich people" comparison for you: Using "percentage magic"

Rich Man: "My income dropped 35% this year!. I only earned 10.5 million dollars! I'm so poor I'll have to sell my third house in Hawaii."

Poor Man: "My income went up 1000 percent this year! I now earn $90,000! I'm rich!"

LOL


Rate this post positively 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 > Economics
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:51 PM.

© 2005-2021, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 36, 37 - Top