Bernie Sanders says top 0.1% in U.S. have almost as much wealth as bottom 90%

[David_42]

... And he's not wrong!
Bernie Sanders says top 0.1% in U.S. have almost as much wealth as bottom 90%

Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders told Liberty University students on Sept. 14 that he didn’t expect them to agree with his liberal views on abortion and gay marriage.

But Sanders, a U.S. senator from Vermont, sought common ground with students at the conservative Christian university in Lynchburg by casting wealth inequality as a moral issue.

"There is no justice, and I want you to hear this clearly, when the top 1/10th of 1 percent -- not 1 percent -- the top 1/10th of 1 percent today in America owns almost as much wealth as the bottom 90 percent," Sanders told the crowd, packed into the Vines Center arena for weekly convocation. "And in your hearts, you will have to determine the morality of that, and the justice of that."

We decided to examine Sanders’ statement that the richest 0.1 percent has nearly as much as the bottom 90 percent. It’s a standard line in Sanders’ speeches. Warren Gunnels, policy director of Sanders’ presidential campaign, said the senator’s source for the statistic is a Nov. 13, 2014, article in The Guardian, a British newspaper.

As our colleagues at PolitiFact Wisconsin have written, the article reported on the findings of a research paper, about wealth inequality during the past 100 years. The study was commissioned by the National Bureau of Economic Research, a nonpartisan organization in Cambridge, Mass., which is best known as the arbiter for determining when the U.S. economy falls into recession.

The authors of the study were economists Emmanuel Saez of the University of California, Berkeley, and Gabriel Zucman of the London School of Economics. Using tax records, they made estimates for 2012 on wealth -- that is, the value of all assets, such as a home, and savings and retirement accounts, minus all debts, such as mortgages and credit card balances.

The top 0.1 percent included 160,000 families with net assets of at least $20 million. Meanwhile, the bottom 90 percent encompassed 144 million families with average wealth of $84,000.

That report says wealth concentration among the richest Americans followed a U-shaped pattern during the past century. It was high in the beginning of the 20th century and then fell from 1929 to 1978. But the study found that wealth concentration among the richest has been rising since, fueled in particular by gains held by the wealthiest 0.1 percent families. The families in that echelon saw their share rise from 7 percent of total household wealth in the late 1970s to 22 percent in 2012.

The bottom 90 percent’s share of the nation’s wealth fell from 35 percent in the mid-1980s to 23 percent in 2012.

 

[Super_Lantern]

Yeah the middle class is dead in America

 

[Mac1958]

Now that I'm thinking about it, I have a question on this.

My guess is that most of us (not all) agree that the current distribution of wealth in this country is not only imbalanced but dangerous. Okay.

So instead of this thread decaying into the standard personal insult and name-calling-fest, how about some actual, concrete, reasonable ideas on how to address the issue?

• Get rid of the long term capital gains break?
• Higher income taxes?
• A wealth tax?
• Drop wealth (death tax) exclusions to $0?

And if we're raising taxes, where specifically does that money go?

Howzabout some specifics for a change?
.

 

[Obiwan]

Obamanomics: Rich Get Richer, Everyone Else Poorer

Using Census data on net worth, the Pew report found that from 2009 to 2011, the richest 7% of Americans saw their net worth climb an average $697,651 — equal to a 28% gain.

The rest of the country saw their net worth drop an average $6,079 — equal to a 4% loss.

As a result, far from making the country more equal, Obama's policies have produced a greater concentration of wealth, with the share of wealth held by the top 7% rising to 63% in 2011, up from 56% in 2009, Pew found.




Read More At Investor's Business Daily: Obamanomics: Rich Get Richer, Everyone Else Poorer
Follow us: @IBDinvestors on Twitter | InvestorsBusinessDaily on Facebook

 

[David_42]

Now that I'm thinking about it, I have a question on this.

My guess is that most of us (not all) agree that the current distribution of wealth in this country is not only imbalanced but dangerous. Okay.

So instead of this thread decaying into the standard personal insult and name-calling-fest, how about some actual, concrete, reasonable ideas on how to address the issue?

• Get rid of the long term capital gains break?
• Higher income taxes?
• A wealth tax?
• Drop wealth (death tax) exclusions to $0?

And if we're raising taxes, where specifically does that money go?

Howzabout some specifics for a change?
.

Sure! I'm happy you're interested in some honest discussion.
I agree with the first 2, the other 2 ideas are a bit to extreme, even for most liberals.
Sanders talks alot about what he wants to do, and he lays out his plans:
On the Issues: Income and Wealth Inequality

 

[David_42]

Obamanomics: Rich Get Richer, Everyone Else Poorer

Using Census data on net worth, the Pew report found that from 2009 to 2011, the richest 7% of Americans saw their net worth climb an average $697,651 — equal to a 28% gain.

The rest of the country saw their net worth drop an average $6,079 — equal to a 4% loss.

As a result, far from making the country more equal, Obama's policies have produced a greater concentration of wealth, with the share of wealth held by the top 7% rising to 63% in 2011, up from 56% in 2009, Pew found.




Read More At Investor's Business Daily: Obamanomics: Rich Get Richer, Everyone Else Poorer
Follow us: @IBDinvestors on Twitter | InvestorsBusinessDaily on Facebook

It's been a trend that's been happening for decades.. Obama can't raise taxes if conservatives will not let him buddy.

 

[FA_Q2]

Now that I'm thinking about it, I have a question on this.

My guess is that most of us (not all) agree that the current distribution of wealth in this country is not only imbalanced but dangerous. Okay.

So instead of this thread decaying into the standard personal insult and name-calling-fest, how about some actual, concrete, reasonable ideas on how to address the issue?

• Get rid of the long term capital gains break?
• Higher income taxes?
• A wealth tax?
• Drop wealth (death tax) exclusions to $0?

And if we're raising taxes, where specifically does that money go?

Howzabout some specifics for a change?
.

How about we treat all money as 'income' rather than separating taxes into different types.

Raising current income taxes is irrelevant - the top .1% do not pay income taxes as they don't make 'income.' Stop protecting big business interests at the cost of the rest of the nation (I am looking at you bailouts) would be another good start.

 

[Mac1958]

Now that I'm thinking about it, I have a question on this.

My guess is that most of us (not all) agree that the current distribution of wealth in this country is not only imbalanced but dangerous. Okay.

So instead of this thread decaying into the standard personal insult and name-calling-fest, how about some actual, concrete, reasonable ideas on how to address the issue?

• Get rid of the long term capital gains break?
• Higher income taxes?
• A wealth tax?
• Drop wealth (death tax) exclusions to $0?

And if we're raising taxes, where specifically does that money go?

Howzabout some specifics for a change?
.

Sure! I'm happy you're interested in some honest discussion.
I agree with the first 2, the other 2 ideas are a bit to extreme, even for most liberals.
Sanders talks alot about what he wants to do, and he lays out his plans:
On the Issues: Income and Wealth Inequality

Looking at his plan, clearly he's doing the bottom-up approach. That infers that he's looking ahead and not at the current hyper-wealthy. That's one of the reasons I ask - I don't see a way a wealth tax could work.

By the way, I'm a financial advisor, and I've been telling clients for a couple of years that the death tax exclusion could drop. I haven't seen any heads explode.

I'm still concerned about what the extra money would be used for, and how efficient that would be. I'm not terribly hopeful.
.

 

[Mac1958]

Raising current income taxes is irrelevant - the top .1% do not pay income taxes as they don't make 'income.' Stop protecting big business interests at the cost of the rest of the nation (I am looking at you bailouts) would be another good start.

Well, eliminating the capital gains rate would effect them, also Sanders recommends removing the Social Security tax cap over $250,000, which would also do some.

But yes, much of the wealth of these people have is in areas that could only be addressed by a wealth tax, and that ain't gonna happen.

They're also talking about a tax on more speculative securities trading.
.

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

 

[ScienceRocks]

Thank you Reagan! Asshole.

The republican party destroyed our middle class and competition in this country through free trade, union breaking and huge loop holes for the super rich....If another one of these assholes get into power our nation will transform back to around 1890.

 

[ScienceRocks]

Now that I'm thinking about it, I have a question on this.

My guess is that most of us (not all) agree that the current distribution of wealth in this country is not only imbalanced but dangerous. Okay.

So instead of this thread decaying into the standard personal insult and name-calling-fest, how about some actual, concrete, reasonable ideas on how to address the issue?

• Get rid of the long term capital gains break?
• Higher income taxes?
• A wealth tax?
• Drop wealth (death tax) exclusions to $0?

And if we're raising taxes, where specifically does that money go?

Howzabout some specifics for a change?
.

Sure! I'm happy you're interested in some honest discussion.
I agree with the first 2, the other 2 ideas are a bit to extreme, even for most liberals.
Sanders talks alot about what he wants to do, and he lays out his plans:
On the Issues: Income and Wealth Inequality

What needs to happen is..
1. Corporations need there loop holes and need to be taxed at 60s levels.
2. Government needs to stop the mergers and globing up all the smaller businesses. Competition!!!
3. Government needs to make it hard for corporations to outsource.
4. People need more bargaining power and Unions within the private sector need to reform.

Either this happens or we're going to start looking like central America or Africa.

 

[FA_Q2]

Raising current income taxes is irrelevant - the top .1% do not pay income taxes as they don't make 'income.' Stop protecting big business interests at the cost of the rest of the nation (I am looking at you bailouts) would be another good start.

Well, eliminating the capital gains rate would effect them, also Sanders recommends removing the Social Security tax cap over $250,000, which would also do some.

But yes, much of the wealth of these people have is in areas that could only be addressed by a wealth tax, and that ain't gonna happen.

They're also talking about a tax on more speculative securities trading.
.

Taxes never have and never will be the answer to pooling wealth.

The wealth is collecting at the top because the power is doing the same. The government continues to regulate and destroy and ability for smaller more efficient businesses to challenge the massive companies that we have today. When the big interests fail the government simply shores them up. As long as that continues to happen, the wealth gap will continue to get worse (and I don't see that changing anytime soon).

The wealth likes the constant focus on taxes - it keeps it away from any meaningful changes that might actually affect that pooling wealth.