A Question regarding Economic Classes

[Chris]

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?

I don't know for sure but it could be the war on unions. Too much immigration isn't helping. Too much exporting of jobs. The rich no longer need US workers to get rich. Where they do at places like walmart they still pay so little because the government covers the rest of the bill.

The unions are not part of the equation. Union membership peaked 50 years ago.
Another problem you have is that union management supports immigration reform.

Immigration reform is vital.

People are assets.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

From 1941 to the 1960's we had high taxes on the rich and high wages. The taxes were invested in education and infrastructure and the high wages created consumer demand. Now we have low taxes for the rich and low wages. What is the result? 23% of total income goes to the top 1%. 70% of our economy is consumer demand. Too much money in too few hands starves the economy of demand. Stagnation is the result.

Raise the minimum wage and tax capital gains as income.

So why is Obama such a horrible Failure?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

I don't know for sure but it could be the war on unions. Too much immigration isn't helping. Too much exporting of jobs. The rich no longer need US workers to get rich. Where they do at places like walmart they still pay so little because the government covers the rest of the bill.

The unions are not part of the equation. Union membership peaked 50 years ago.
Another problem you have is that union management supports immigration reform.

Immigration reform is vital.

People are assets.

Progressives are Liabilities

 

[thereisnospoon]

How can the Democrats be in charge when the House is Republican and the Republicans in the Senate can block all legislation with the filibuster?

if Dems arent in charge now then Republicans werent for 6 bush years; no make that all 8 years; since they NEVER had a filibuster-proof majority; not for one day

you're a clown

funny leftard; were Republicans able to block obamacare?

Obama's Stimulus?

obama's fin-reg?

Lilly Ledbetter?

i guess you're claiming Republicans agreed with all these things?


libs are losers who lie to themselves

So now you're saying that the Republicans never ran things, while you're also saying that the poor were better off when Republicans ran things.

You are one confused corky.

Another lib poster trying to deflect the discussion by creating their own narrative.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

and then you crashed the economy for the second time in one lifetimes with your deregulation.


why the hell do that again fool?

No...Liberal politicians did that. They set up the rules. They created the housing market. They permitted the conditions.
And now after 5 years of stability in the housing market through tight credit, that Idiot Mel Watt is back at it again.

The crash was caused by Republican deregulation.

Wall Street ran a derivatives based Ponzi scheme that destroyed the world economy. It was NOT the housing market.

Lair!!!

Fannie and Freddie were the Binary Financial Black Holes at the center of the meltdown

 

[The Rabbi]

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?

i get what you're saying but i find it difficult because comparing 'incomes' doesn't seem right when some are earned and others are simply charity....

Doesnt matter. If it constitutes either money or its equivalent into the household then it's income.

 

[The Rabbi]

and then you crashed the economy for the second time in one lifetimes with your deregulation.


why the hell do that again fool?

No...Liberal politicians did that. They set up the rules. They created the housing market. They permitted the conditions.
And now after 5 years of stability in the housing market through tight credit, that Idiot Mel Watt is back at it again.

The crash was caused by Republican deregulation.

Wall Street ran a derivatives based Ponzi scheme that destroyed the world economy. It was NOT the housing market.

There was no deregulation. That canard was debunked about 1M posts ago.

 

[The Rabbi]

Is that part of the reason conservatives want to make America's poor poorer? Because that is the conservative economic plan.

HA.....This is Obama's watch. Democrats run the Senate. The Senate has the final word. So, where is the democrat plan?

The Democratic plan is to increase infrastructure spending and raise the minimum wage.

Both have been blocked by Republicans.

And they worked really well the last time they were tried, right?
Remember the definition of insanity.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

HA.....This is Obama's watch. Democrats run the Senate. The Senate has the final word. So, where is the democrat plan?

The Democratic plan is to increase infrastructure spending and raise the minimum wage.

Both have been blocked by Republicans.

And they worked really well the last time they were tried, right?
Remember the definition of insanity.

 

[thereisnospoon]

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?

In simple terms, the widening range of income levels comes from an economy which out of adjustment. Specifically, the mechanisms of wealth distribution don't balance the mechanisms of wealth creation.

Our market capitalism is a high powered wealth creating system -- albeit one with a hgh level of risk and instability as well. For the past 25 years or so the most powerful wealth creating sectors have been financial services and technology, particularly the technology of automation, robotics and data management. These sectors have produced fabulous wealth but are characterized by relatively low labor input. There are a number of mechanisms (compound interest, economy of scale, natural monopoly) in our system which produce capital concentration.

Our mechanisms of wealth distribution include, of course, wages. But since the labor input of the most productve sectors of the economy is low, relatively little of the wealth produced goes to workers.

This imbalance between wealth creation and wealth distribution was recognized a century ago and additional mechanism were created: graduated income tax and inheritance taxes, compensatory government programs in health, education and welfare etc. These government programs designed to balance the inherent tendency toward capital concentration have been under attack since 1980 and are no longer adequate to keep the wealth generated in our economy distributed adequately for the needs of our society.

In simple terms, you can't run a 21st century production system with a 19th century distribution system.

I think some of your points are valid.
Technology has enabled us to produce more with fewer workers in fewer hours.
Technology has made requirements to even find employment in manufacturing more stringent. There is no place for a person with a HS diploma in manufacturing unless they have gone to an accredited technical school. The days where one finished high school or dropped out, went to the local factory, was handed a broom or a mop and thirty years later retired at age 55.
One of the major issues with this so called wealth gap is not how much the lower skilled worker earns. Rather, it is what they do with their money once they cash their checks.
Since the 60's kids were brought up to believe that they were entitled to what their parents had or at least the same standard of living. As those kids had kids of their own, they taught them that they 'deserved'. One big difference. Our parents told us we had to work for it.
Successive generation of parents told their kids they deserved it.
So those people decided that swiping a credit card or bowing their entire savings account to get what they wanted was better than socking money away for their future.
The resulting fall out is people on the lower to middle levels of the income scale who are broker than broke.
The moral to the story is for people to live within their means.

 

[Wry Catcher]

I suspect both the Right and Left political parties are tearing the middle class apart. Costs keep rising while wages remain stagnant, and should you succeed in your job you get taxed very heavily.

Since there is no effort from the left to deny workers the right to organize and bargain collectively it's kinda hard equate the left with stagnant wages, nor does the left hope to put government employees on the bread line, pretending the largess of Brothers Koch and the Wal-Mart children will trickle down, keeping them in their homes and able to feed their kids.

The right, for lack of a better term (Neo Fascists, some; Anarchists, others; fools, mostly) seem oblivious to reality and totally callous when it comes to American citizens who struggle and/or depend on Social Security or SSI, Medicare or Medicaid. Simply look at how they oppose raising the minimum wage or providing and extension of UE. Honestly they don't give a damn about anyone but themselves; they live by the code, "I've got mine, fuck the rest of you".

 

[Chris]

For Republicans America is a platform for individual fulfillment. But here's the catch: the Individual is defined in the narrowest possible terms. Any notion of the "The Public Good" is seen as "Socialism" (socialism being anything the government does for the non-wealthy). The Free Market will fix New Orleans levees. The Free Market will effectively control the amount of derivative based risk Wall Street will take. The Free Market will get us off imported oil(rather than spending decades making terrorists stronger). The Free Market will keep our rivers clean. The Free Market will make healthcare more efficient. The Free Market won't bribe Washington in order to increase it's profit margin. We don't need to worry about "The Public Good", individual selfishness driven by short term profit is a utopian reflex.

But the world doesn't work that way. Selfishness harms society....tears it apart....destroys the world economy....spills millions of barrels of oil in the Gulf of Mexico.....tears a hole in the ozone...creates a garbage patch in the Pacific Ocean twice the size of Texas...melts the North Polar ice cap.....creates massive deficits by giving huge tax breaks to the wealthy....

But the Republicans celebrate this selfishness. It is their core value. For them greed is good.

 

[TemplarKormac]

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?

To be blunt, it's called real life, Wake. Government through it's own fault is widening that gap via entitlement programs.

 

[TemplarKormac]

And I'll pose a counterquestion:

How does one get rich on welfare checks?

 

[Wry Catcher]

For Republicans America is a platform for individual fulfillment. But here's the catch: the Individual is defined in the narrowest possible terms. Any notion of the "The Public Good" is seen as "Socialism" (socialism being anything the government does for the non-wealthy). The Free Market will fix New Orleans levees. The Free Market will effectively control the amount of derivative based risk Wall Street will take. The Free Market will get us off imported oil(rather than spending decades making terrorists stronger). The Free Market will keep our rivers clean. The Free Market will make healthcare more efficient. The Free Market won't bribe Washington in order to increase it's profit margin. We don't need to worry about "The Public Good", individual selfishness driven by short term profit is a utopian reflex.

But the world doesn't work that way. Selfishness harms society....tears it apart....destroys the world economy....spills millions of barrels of oil in the Gulf of Mexico.....tears a hole in the ozone...creates a garbage patch in the Pacific Ocean twice the size of Texas...melts the North Polar ice cap.....creates massive deficits by giving huge tax breaks to the wealthy....

But the Republicans celebrate this selfishness. It is their core value. For them greed is good.

Clear, concise and spot on post! Thank you.

 

[Wry Catcher]

No...Liberal politicians did that. They set up the rules. They created the housing market. They permitted the conditions.
And now after 5 years of stability in the housing market through tight credit, that Idiot Mel Watt is back at it again.

The crash was caused by Republican deregulation.

Wall Street ran a derivatives based Ponzi scheme that destroyed the world economy. It was NOT the housing market.

There was no deregulation. That canard was debunked about 1M posts ago.

Liar!

"The term Glass–Steagall Act usually refers to four provisions of the U.S. Banking Act of 1933 that limited commercial bank securities activities and affiliations within commercial banks and securities firms.[1] Congressional efforts to “repeal the Glass–Steagall Act” referred to those four provisions (and then usually to only the two provisions that restricted affiliations between commercial banks and securities firms).[2] Those efforts culminated in the 1999 Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act (GLBA), which repealed the two provisions restricting affiliations between banks and securities firms"

Glass?Steagall Legislation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"The Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act (GLB), also known as the Financial Services Modernization Act of 1999, (Pub.L. 106–102, 113 Stat. 1338, enacted November 12, 1999) is an act of the 106th United States Congress (1999–2001). It repealed part of the Glass–Steagall Act of 1933, removing barriers in the market among banking companies, securities companies and insurance companies that prohibited any one institution from acting as any combination of an investment bank, a commercial bank, and an insurance company."

So Rabbi, prove you're not a liar.

 

[The Rabbi]

The crash was caused by Republican deregulation.

Wall Street ran a derivatives based Ponzi scheme that destroyed the world economy. It was NOT the housing market.

There was no deregulation. That canard was debunked about 1M posts ago.

Liar!

"The term Glass–Steagall Act usually refers to four provisions of the U.S. Banking Act of 1933 that limited commercial bank securities activities and affiliations within commercial banks and securities firms.[1] Congressional efforts to “repeal the Glass–Steagall Act” referred to those four provisions (and then usually to only the two provisions that restricted affiliations between commercial banks and securities firms).[2] Those efforts culminated in the 1999 Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act (GLBA), which repealed the two provisions restricting affiliations between banks and securities firms"

Glass?Steagall Legislation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"The Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act (GLB), also known as the Financial Services Modernization Act of 1999, (Pub.L. 106–102, 113 Stat. 1338, enacted November 12, 1999) is an act of the 106th United States Congress (1999–2001). It repealed part of the Glass–Steagall Act of 1933, removing barriers in the market among banking companies, securities companies and insurance companies that prohibited any one institution from acting as any combination of an investment bank, a commercial bank, and an insurance company."

So Rabbi, prove you're not a liar.

I'm not sure whether your ignorance or stupidity is more astounding. Repeal of Glass Steagel occurred in 1999. The meltdown was 9 years later. That's a big stretch to claim that kind of causality. I wont even bother asking you what about glass-steagal would have prevented the meltdown, as it did not prevent the S&L crisis, the Latin American debt crisis, or numerous other banking crises that occurred while Glass Steagal was in force. You don't have the chops to answer a question like that.
Remind me who voted for it? Oh yeah, 138 Democrats in the House and 1 Dem in the Senate. WHo signed it? Right, Bill Clinton, that stalwart of the GOP. So there was no GOP deregulation accounting for the meltdown. And that exchange has happened about 50 times since I've been posting here, you've read most of them, and you still insist it isn't true.
I know you became a LEO because you failed at everything else and it would give you the opportunity to satisfy your bizarre taste for illegal Mexican cock. I'm not sure whether you had a GSW to the head, or whether you were just born fucking stupid.

 

[Wry Catcher]

There was no deregulation. That canard was debunked about 1M posts ago.

Liar!

"The term Glass–Steagall Act usually refers to four provisions of the U.S. Banking Act of 1933 that limited commercial bank securities activities and affiliations within commercial banks and securities firms.[1] Congressional efforts to “repeal the Glass–Steagall Act” referred to those four provisions (and then usually to only the two provisions that restricted affiliations between commercial banks and securities firms).[2] Those efforts culminated in the 1999 Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act (GLBA), which repealed the two provisions restricting affiliations between banks and securities firms"

Glass?Steagall Legislation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"The Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act (GLB), also known as the Financial Services Modernization Act of 1999, (Pub.L. 106–102, 113 Stat. 1338, enacted November 12, 1999) is an act of the 106th United States Congress (1999–2001). It repealed part of the Glass–Steagall Act of 1933, removing barriers in the market among banking companies, securities companies and insurance companies that prohibited any one institution from acting as any combination of an investment bank, a commercial bank, and an insurance company."

So Rabbi, prove you're not a liar.

I'm not sure whether your ignorance or stupidity is more astounding. Repeal of Glass Steagel occurred in 1999. The meltdown was 9 years later. That's a big stretch to claim that kind of causality. I wont even bother asking you what about glass-steagal would have prevented the meltdown, as it did not prevent the S&L crisis, the Latin American debt crisis, or numerous other banking crises that occurred while Glass Steagal was in force. You don't have the chops to answer a question like that.
Remind me who voted for it? Oh yeah, 138 Democrats in the House and 1 Dem in the Senate. WHo signed it? Right, Bill Clinton, that stalwart of the GOP. So there was no GOP deregulation accounting for the meltdown. And that exchange has happened about 50 times since I've been posting here, you've read most of them, and you still insist it isn't true.
I know you became a LEO because you failed at everything else and it would give you the opportunity to satisfy your bizarre taste for illegal Mexican cock. I'm not sure whether you had a GSW to the head, or whether you were just born fucking stupid.

Nice try Rabbi. More evidence you a liar, not too bright, vulgar and a bigot. Did you not notice - or choose to lie by omission - these three Republicans: Gramm–Leach–Bliley

 

[CrusaderFrank]

I suspect both the Right and Left political parties are tearing the middle class apart. Costs keep rising while wages remain stagnant, and should you succeed in your job you get taxed very heavily.

Since there is no effort from the left to deny workers the right to organize and bargain collectively it's kinda hard equate the left with stagnant wages, nor does the left hope to put government employees on the bread line, pretending the largess of Brothers Koch and the Wal-Mart children will trickle down, keeping them in their homes and able to feed their kids.

The right, for lack of a better term (Neo Fascists, some; Anarchists, others; fools, mostly) seem oblivious to reality and totally callous when it comes to American citizens who struggle and/or depend on Social Security or SSI, Medicare or Medicaid. Simply look at how they oppose raising the minimum wage or providing and extension of UE. Honestly they don't give a damn about anyone but themselves; they live by the code, "I've got mine, fuck the rest of you".

Yes, it's the Kulaks thwarting the Workers Paradise

 

[The Rabbi]

Liar!

"The term Glass–Steagall Act usually refers to four provisions of the U.S. Banking Act of 1933 that limited commercial bank securities activities and affiliations within commercial banks and securities firms.[1] Congressional efforts to “repeal the Glass–Steagall Act” referred to those four provisions (and then usually to only the two provisions that restricted affiliations between commercial banks and securities firms).[2] Those efforts culminated in the 1999 Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act (GLBA), which repealed the two provisions restricting affiliations between banks and securities firms"

Glass?Steagall Legislation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"The Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act (GLB), also known as the Financial Services Modernization Act of 1999, (Pub.L. 106–102, 113 Stat. 1338, enacted November 12, 1999) is an act of the 106th United States Congress (1999–2001). It repealed part of the Glass–Steagall Act of 1933, removing barriers in the market among banking companies, securities companies and insurance companies that prohibited any one institution from acting as any combination of an investment bank, a commercial bank, and an insurance company."

So Rabbi, prove you're not a liar.

I'm not sure whether your ignorance or stupidity is more astounding. Repeal of Glass Steagel occurred in 1999. The meltdown was 9 years later. That's a big stretch to claim that kind of causality. I wont even bother asking you what about glass-steagal would have prevented the meltdown, as it did not prevent the S&L crisis, the Latin American debt crisis, or numerous other banking crises that occurred while Glass Steagal was in force. You don't have the chops to answer a question like that.
Remind me who voted for it? Oh yeah, 138 Democrats in the House and 1 Dem in the Senate. WHo signed it? Right, Bill Clinton, that stalwart of the GOP. So there was no GOP deregulation accounting for the meltdown. And that exchange has happened about 50 times since I've been posting here, you've read most of them, and you still insist it isn't true.
I know you became a LEO because you failed at everything else and it would give you the opportunity to satisfy your bizarre taste for illegal Mexican cock. I'm not sure whether you had a GSW to the head, or whether you were just born fucking stupid.

Nice try Rabbi. More evidence you a liar, not too bright, vulgar and a bigot. Did you not notice - or choose to lie by omission - these three Republicans: Gramm–Leach–Bliley

You're simply unhinged, didnt read my post, didnt understand it. Get the cock out of your mouth and try again.