A Question regarding Economic Classes

A gap between the rich and the poor is continuing to widen.

The poor get poorer while the rich get richer, it seems.

Why is this, guys?

Could it have something to do with when a CEO gets $25M in free stocks it is counted, but when a poor person gets $25K in free government assistance, it isn't?
 
the right will never survive this democracy.

that is a good thing.

we end their cheating and they are done
 
why should we consider government aid to be real income....?

if that were true the government could declare everybody gets an equal paycheck and all would be well in liberal lala land....:cuckoo:

the very fact that the poor need more aid (look at the food stamp amount increases) proves that they are in fact getting poorer...

If I give you $200 a month, that's income, right?
If I give you vouchers for $200 worth of food a month, shouldn't that also be income?

no that's charity...
government vouchers are government charity...charity from all of us who actually work for our incomes...

do the poor pay taxes on their 'income'...i.e., charity.....?

Doesnt really matter. Income is income. If your parents gave you $200/mo it would still be income for these purposes.
 
First, the poor aren't getting poorer. That's a myth. However, they aren't improving much either.

The reasons are because of the application of technology and the opening of China. Those who are able to manipulate technology in the knowledge-based economy have done well. Those who can't, haven't. This trend isn't changing. China lowered the global labor cost curve. Capital followed, and have been generating outsized returns relative to history. This trend probably is changing as labor in China is getting more expensive.

Wage inequality has been growing since the late 1960s. It's not a new phenomenon.

beg to differ....the poor and the middle class are both getting relatively poorer because the dollar is buying less and less....prices for food, gas, clothing, etc. keep rising....meanwhile thanks to Obamacare earned incomes are becoming stagnant, cut, or nonexistent...

This isn't true, at least over longer periods of time. Real incomes include adjustments for inflation and have been either stagnant or rising for all quintiles.

i guess that may be true over longer periods of time.....however today incomes are obviously not so stable as the number of poor appears to have increased substantially...

The Census definition, or rate, determines poverty by comparing pretax cash income against a poverty threshold dollar amount that is adjusted for family size and composition.[1] In 2010, according to the official measure, 46.2 million people, or 15.1 percent of the total U.S. population, lived in poverty. This figure was up from 43.6 million people, or 14.3 percent, in 2009, making 2010 the fourth consecutive year that the official U.S. poverty rate has increased. Additionally, 2010 had the highest total number of people living in poverty in the 52 years that poverty estimates have been published.

Who is poor? | Institute for Research on Poverty | University of Wisconsin–Madison
 
If I give you $200 a month, that's income, right?
If I give you vouchers for $200 worth of food a month, shouldn't that also be income?

no that's charity...
government vouchers are government charity...charity from all of us who actually work for our incomes...

do the poor pay taxes on their 'income'...i.e., charity.....?

Doesnt really matter. Income is income. If your parents gave you $200/mo it would still be income for these purposes.

so food stamps are taxed as income....? Obamacare subsidies are taxed as income....?
 
This has been one of the more informative topics I have read on USMB. It is a bit of a disappointment that my previous statement has nothing to do with the subject and is about those posting.

Both side are extremists which indicates a limited thought process because extremism usually will not allow the existence of creative thought.

The use of slogans which are meaningless as they seldom apply to the subject. They are easier to remember.

The above applies to both sides (just a reminder) The difference is only the subject which can never be resolved because of the mental inflexibility. I have seen a few good ideas, not in this thread though) from both sides; but the inability to accept the fact that the opposition has a good idea prevents them from admitting it.

The use of profanity from both sides is usually an indication of limited mental function and the fear of having to admit no one has all of the answers or your position might be wrong.

Locking on the part of both sides are honesty and ethics.
 
Check this out and look at the comments.

There are people who will vote to keep themselves poor and to make sure they, their g-kids and their g-kid's g-kids will never have the ability or opportunity to be anything but poor.

Absolutely mind boggling but we see it here and we see it in every election.

Darn right. Lower class people need to get it through their minds that Democrat politicians promising to make their lives better by imposing taxes on rich people and giving them money are just lying,and their programs are responsible for the poverty they experience.

Really?

Show us how a poor family gets less poor if you take away their Medicaid, or their public schooling, or their food stamps, or their housing assistance.

Show us how the same poor family, minus all of that, is less poor.
 
How does taxation lower the wage gap?

It discourages people from working and earning more.
Dems want equality. They want everyone poor and miserable.

Capitalism pushes all wealth towards the top. Democratic government pushes it back down.

Rightttttttttttt.

Capitalism made the USA the worlds #1 economy. You got something better than #1, let's hear it. Your Democratic government have been creating nothing but Third World Cesspools
 
you can't count income twice...

Nobody suggested it would be. It is that some things are not treated as income for the poor, while being treated as income for the wealthy in these comparisons. To have a true reflection of the relationship between the two, IMO, it would be far better to include non-taxable things like Section 8, PPACA subsidies, and the like in as "income" as they have monetary value in the same way a stock option does. It would also give us a better understanding of the attributes of distribution policies so that we could better understand and appreciate their effectiveness or identify and correct their weaknesses.
 
no that's charity...
government vouchers are government charity...charity from all of us who actually work for our incomes...

do the poor pay taxes on their 'income'...i.e., charity.....?

Doesnt really matter. Income is income. If your parents gave you $200/mo it would still be income for these purposes.

so food stamps are taxed as income....? Obamacare subsidies are taxed as income....?

It's not income for tax purposes. If you mow your neighbor's lawn for $20 and dont declare it is that suddenly not income to you?
Look, this isn't a hard concept. Why are you having trouble with it?
 
Check this out and look at the comments.

There are people who will vote to keep themselves poor and to make sure they, their g-kids and their g-kid's g-kids will never have the ability or opportunity to be anything but poor.

Absolutely mind boggling but we see it here and we see it in every election.

Darn right. Lower class people need to get it through their minds that Democrat politicians promising to make their lives better by imposing taxes on rich people and giving them money are just lying,and their programs are responsible for the poverty they experience.

Really?

Show us how a poor family gets less poor if you take away their Medicaid, or their public schooling, or their food stamps, or their housing assistance.

Show us how the same poor family, minus all of that, is less poor.

Because they actually have to work to afford those things, so tend to order their lives towards greater prosperity.
Undler the Gingrich/Clinton welfare reform lots of welfare families were tossed off welfare. They ended up being better off because they got trained for jobs and changed their shopping habits to be more frugal.
I realize that is beyond Stage One thinking so thereofre you are incapable of grasping it. But maybe others understand.
 
A gap between the rich and the poor is continuing to widen.

The poor get poorer while the rich get richer, it seems.

Why is this, guys?

NIce try.
There is no proof of this.
First, you've not defined 'rich' or 'poor'....Second, you've not illustrated the purpose of your thread.
 

Forum List

Back
Top