Economists say that the economic inequality is at its worst since the great depression

[HappyTexan]

Originally Posted by pknopp

And the artificially low interest rates today are there to encourage people to continue doing that.

The low rates are for the benefit of government and business, not people.
None of that QE is getting to Main Street. It's circulating within Wall Street.

The people should want high rates so their savings earn money.
Borrowing money at low rates is no way to better yourself.

High rates will encourage savings and prudent purchases.
At one time mortgage rates were near 18% and people still bought homes.

[pknopp]

Originally Posted by HappyTexan

The low rates are for the benefit of government and business, not people.
None of that QE is getting to Main Street. It's circulating within Wall Street.

The people should want high rates so their savings earn money.
Borrowing money at low rates is no way to better yourself.

High rates will encourage savings and prudent purchases.
At one time mortgage rates were near 18% and people still bought homes.

I completely agree that it does more harm than good and that the government is more concerned with their ability to borrow cheaply than for people to be able to.

It does those in government no good for us to save. When I bought my first house the rate was 9.9%. Retiree's didn't have to go back to work at Wal-Mart to survive then either.

[Loveshiscountry]

Originally Posted by LexusNexus

The core of the Republican ideology is to emphasize the DIFFERENCES which separate us not the similiarities which bring us together. It's no wonder that 8 years of Bush and 4 years of tea party-downgraded Republicans in Congress, have contributed mightily to inequality at every turn.

Is that why you falsely play the race card in your plethora of vapid cheerleader posts?
This post of yours is no different. It didn't say anything meaningful, just made up rhetoric.

[michiganmoon]

Should we allow less immigration in to the country to combat wealth inequality? An influx of millions of no wealth/low skill/low wage people mathematically would make more wealth inequality.

Should the government mandate savings to build wealth instead of debt consumption?

Should Social Security be changed to an annuity with inheritance rights to the individuals balance to build wealth among the poor?

[InformedConsent]

Originally Posted by beb0p

Actually SF is fast becoming a place for the rich and the poor; the middle class (the true middle class who's making between $50k to $90k roughly) is being squeezed out.

Indeed. It's a microcosm of popular liberalism.

[skoro]

Yet one of the major parties keeps insisting that American millionaires have it too hard and are in dire need of tax cuts. They're constantly saying that working folks have too much money while millionaires don't have enough.

[InformedConsent]

Originally Posted by HappyTexan

People were spending instead of saving.
Got themselves deep into debt because of "easy credit".

Yep. Pulled forward demand. When the credit hits the limit; the spending stops. But the debt remains. For a long, long time...

Not many saved for that "rainy day" which hit us in 2008.
The bubbles burst and reality reared its ugly head and many found out they weren't as rich as they thought.

Exactly.