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.
Indeed. The increase in the depth of poverty tracks the increase in productivity leading to profit. How the heck can any intelligent person miss that connection? Answer: They can't: They just deny it because if they admitted it, even just to themselves, it would destroy their fragile, house-of-cards perspective.
I think you'd see that the dramatic rise in single parent households over the same period correlates, and more importantly is like to be a direct cause of the increase in poverty.
No 1% person forced a poor single mother to have babies. The government on the other hand, said "it's OK - we'll help you even if you do really dumb things."
I don't really think that, as a society, we want to confer blessings on generation after generation who contribute nothing to society, simply because somebody in the far distant past happened to amass a great sum of wealth.
I do. If it's my wealth, I should be able to give it to anybody I choose. And then that person should be able to do whatever they want with it. As a society, we should value freedom and respect other people's property.
If you think it's about jealousy, you just don't get it. As economist Joseph Stiglitz wrote:
If you think the pie is fixed and taking from one person to give to another is a good solution, you just don't get it.
The fact that George Soros has billions has no impact on me. So quit worrying about George Soros and start worrying about getting people to work. Jobs is the solution, not wealth redistribution. Unemployment and underemployment is the problem, not wealth inequality.
I think you'd see that the dramatic rise in single parent households over the same period correlates, and more importantly is like to be a direct cause of the increase in poverty.
No 1% person forced a poor single mother to have babies. The government on the other hand, said "it's OK - we'll help you even if you do really dumb things."
The government encourages poor mothers to have babies. It's part of our tax and welfare structure. That's why half of our babies are born to (mostly poor) single mothers.
Washington, DC is now the capital for the top 1%, not New York City.
Yeah. Instead of Obama, we want someone like Romney, who pledged to cut capital gains taxes, dividend taxes and eliminate inheritance taxes, while denouncing the underclass as moochers. Obama at least raised taxes on the wealthy -- not enough, but at least it was in the right direction.
The wealthy create wealth, the ”poor" redistribute the wealth of others. You need a lesson in basic macroeconomics.
That's not macroeconomics. That's trashanomics. When consumers, including the poor, buy things that's demand, and demand creates jobs and economic activity.
The wealthy create wealth, the ”poor" redistribute the wealth of others. You need a lesson in basic macroeconomics.
That means nothing if you do not add the "greed equation" to it. Just because the wealthy aremaking more money than ever before does not mean that they are going to help anyone else. It sounds to me that you fell for the "trickle down theory" pushed by the Reaganites in the early 80's
You are wrong. We've seen those (useless) charts for quite some time. But most of us don't care what rich people make. We are not jealous.
But these are the same people that are very concerned about what the poor is getting in help from the government
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.