Charts from the senate income inequity hearing

[Big Fitz]

the Senate Budget Committee.


You guys are pretending its only posters is lying

"its only posters is"

TDM, you illiterate dumbass, it takes too much effort to translate your incoherent gibberish into English.

It's Libberish.

 

[Liability]

Why is the right refusing to back up their claims once again?


Prove income inequality has NO effect on revolutions?

Why are you asking that "question?" Your question and proposition are totally irrelevant.

Nobody cares if some folks are upset that the "haves" tend to have more than the relative "have nots."

What YOU are ducking is the real question.

In WHAT WAY, exactly, is it "wrong" for a society to have income inequality?

 

[Full-Auto]

Why is the right refusing to back up their claims once again?


Prove income inequality has NO effect on revolutions?

I just did, I posted a chart showing the point iin your OP is just warmed over poppeycock. the variance over 90 years has been remarkably close.

In other words you have owned him.

No, no trades allowed.

 

[Big Fitz]

WHERE is you example from history guys?


Come on show us that time in history when a populous uprising was not coupled with a income inequality?



Its matters because its an historicla fact.


You just have to ignore history to buy the right wing propaganda lies.

I'm beginning to wonder if she reads responses. Mebbe she doesn't know how.

 

[Big Fitz]

This is not a democracy.....it is a republic.

I cannot see why inequity is such a problem for you. It seems to have grown under Obama and will continue to grow. He seems to be encouraging the widening gap between the haves and the have-nots. His policies are making the rich even more rich.

Seems to me that if you live in a country that allows you to move out of the cellar and into the penthouse you would be more appreciative.

No, you want someone to give you what you think you deserve instead of earn it. If you lived in another country you couldn't even earn it because you weren't born into a privileged family.

I belive the term is Aristocracy...

Pretty much. Snobs ruling the rest of us peasants.

Ah the desired outcome for Libs. Them ruling us, looking down on us the whole while.

 

[Liability]

the Senate Budget Committee.


You guys are pretending its only posters is lying

"its only posters is"

TDM, you illiterate dumbass, it takes too much effort to translate your incoherent gibberish into English.

It's Libberish.

There once was a poster from County Cork
who everyone thought was a dork
she twisted her words
while playing the nerd
and now she screams "LAIR" all -- uhm -- fashsits!

 

[Article 15]

Why is the right refusing to back up their claims once again?


Prove income inequality has NO effect on revolutions?

I just did, I posted a chart showing the point iin your OP is just warmed over poppeycock. the variance over 90 years has been remarkably close.

The OP and the charts in the link relate to the growing income inequality, not wealth.

You may all now continue with your daily circle jerk.

 

[Big Fitz]

Why is the right refusing to back up their claims once again?


Prove income inequality has NO effect on revolutions?

I just did, I posted a chart showing the point iin your OP is just warmed over poppeycock. the variance over 90 years has been remarkably close.

The OP and the charts in the link relate to the growing income inequality, not wealth.

You may all now continue with your daily circle jerk.

Yes. another irrelevancy. It's like worrying about the shape of clouds.

 

[Trajan]

Why is the right refusing to back up their claims once again?


Prove income inequality has NO effect on revolutions?

I just did, I posted a chart showing the point iin your OP is just warmed over poppeycock. the variance over 90 years has been remarkably close.

The OP and the charts in the link relate to the growing income inequality, not wealth.

You may all now continue with your daily circle jerk.

false dichotomy.
wealth, or net worth, is the total value of your assets minus debts.

Wealth is an expression of where the vehicle - income- has gotten you. And I think you need to remember this is not a static zero sum in this context, I will make the point again- the populace as classes do not stand still, this is and always has been an upwardly mobile society.

in the end, the same arguments have been being made for decades...and yet, the variance is as I said minimal over 90 years....if your premise has value you need to explain how that can be....

 

[Rozman]

And if the Libs wishes are granted and the
filthy evil lying cheating mother effin rich had
to pay 90% in taxes just what will happen
to that money when government gets their
hands on it.

What is it exactly you guys want done with that money.
Give it directly to the poor.
Enlighten us please....For when this country still has a problem
who are you Libs going to go after next.

 

[Baruch Menachem]

This is one of those evergreen discussions where both sides are incredulous about the other sides position. For the right, worrying about the wealth of the other guy is at best psychologically unhealthy and is pretty much a sin. (Thou shalt not covet etc etc.) Made into actual policy it is destructive of society by making sticking it to the other guy rather than collecting the cash needed to run government the basis of taxation.

For the left, the right's disdain of the issue is seen as deliberately obtuse to ignore such an important piece of social injustice. Or so they say. I personally can't give much credence to their statements in the matter as I see their point of view as sick and sinful

 

[Trajan]

merged

 

[Skull Pilot]

Do you sheep really think that the government taking money away from those who make more than you will increase your income?

Has the government pilfered any of your money and given it to Mitt?

How is that an answer to my question?

 

[Skull Pilot]

When you "starve the beast" quess what happens?

the "beast" dies.

You didn't answer my question, as usual.

You're question was retarded.

It's the crux of your moonbat argument that some people make too much more than others.

If raising taxes is supposed to cure this destructive income inequality just how will it do that?

Or are you ovine enough to believe that if taxes are raised on those evil rich people that yours will be lowered?

 

[Skull Pilot]

Vilfredo Pareto - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Vilfredo Federico Damaso Pareto (Italian pronunciation: [vilˈfreːdo paˈreːto]; 15 July 1848 – 19 August 1923), born Wilfried Fritz Pareto, was an Italian engineer, sociologist, economist, political scientist and philosopher. He made several important contributions to economics, particularly in the study of income distribution and in the analysis of individuals' choices.

He introduced the concept of Pareto efficiency and helped develop the field of microeconomics. He also was the first to discover that income follows a Pareto distribution, which is a power law probability distribution. The Pareto principle was named after him and built on observations of his such as that 80% of the land in Italy was owned by 20% of the population. He also contributed to the fields of sociology and mathematics.


"His legacy as an economist was profound. Partly because of him, the field evolved from a branch of moral philosophy as practiced by Adam Smith into a data intensive field of scientific research and mathematical equations. His books look more like modern economics than most other texts of that day: tables of statistics from across the world and ages, rows of integral signs and equations, intricate charts and graphs."[

The Pareto principle.

20% of people do 80% of the work.

In the USA 20% of the people pay 80% of the income taxes.


I guess he was right but he forgot the corollary

The 80% of people that do the 20% of the work want the other 20% of people to do their work too.

Apply that corollary to the US tax code and you get:

The 80% of people who pay 20% of income taxes want the 20% of people who pay 80% of income taxes to pay 100% of income taxes.

 

[Trajan]

You didn't answer my question, as usual.

You're question was retarded.

It's the crux of your moonbat argument that some people make too much more than others.

If raising taxes is supposed to cure this destructive income inequality just how will it do that?

Or are you ovine enough to believe that if taxes are raised on those evil rich people that yours will be lowered?

It’s a hustle, they trot this out to work folks up because they have nothing to run on, taking advantage of the bad econ. now and willfully ignoring the history, the left is particularly adept at that imho.

there is no question really…..the variance ala 'wealth distribution' since 1922 till 2007 is approx 4% +/- .5%.

1922 63.3% 36.7%
2007 65.4% 34.6%
(see post 56 for the numbers overall)

its been as high as 80 and a slow as 19%.

 

[The T]

And if the Libs wishes are granted and the
filthy evil lying cheating mother effin rich had
to pay 90% in taxes just what will happen
to that money when government gets their
hands on it.

What is it exactly you guys want done with that money.
Give it directly to the poor.
Enlighten us please....For when this country still has a problem
who are you Libs going to go after next.

The O has already shown us. The Constitution with him as the sole arbitor.

 

[Article 15]

Just make up your opponents argument, attack, and get high fives from your brethren. All in a days work for a USMB Right Wing Nut.

The "crux" of my argument is not that if taxes are raised on the rich, I will get more income. That's not even what I would argue.

My point is that over the last 30 years the wages of the majority of Americans have not been keeping up with the cost of living while a small few flourishing more so than ever. That's an undeniable fact that y'all wish to ignore and I think that's fucked up a) that it's happening and b) that a lot of people not only don't see anything wrong with it but try to shout it down when it's brought up. I'm not alone but it's all "irrelevant" you guys. Wages are stagnant for most and things have been getting harder and harder for all but a few. Ho hum. You see what's been going on around you and you don't bat an eye at it.

The sad thing is that the grip is so strong and so accepted that there's really not much that can be done about it. The country as a whole has to bend over and take it.

Y'all are an embarrassment.

Boot lickers.

 

[Baruch Menachem]

My point is that over the last 30 years the wages of the majority of Americans have not been keeping up with the cost of living while a small few flourishing more so than ever. That's an undeniable fact that y'all wish to ignore and I think that's fucked up a) that it's happening and b) that a lot of people not only don't see anything wrong with it but try to shout it down when it's brought up. I'm not alone but it's all "irrelevant" you guys. Wages are stagnant for most and things have been getting harder and harder for all but a few. Ho hum. You see what's been going on around you and you don't bat an eye at it.

Your issue is that most of the wealth that is generated by the expanding economy goes into a small set of hands? And that for the rest of us the wealth is sinking?

I would argue you are missing some important parts of the equation. The richest guys now are not the richest guys 20 year ago. I dont' remember who the super rich were back then, but now we have names like Gates and Jobs. 30 years ago they were college drop outs working in the back of a garage. Buffet is relatively new. George Soros is also relatively new. Paris Hilton seems determined to squander her family's fortune as fast as she can. There is a constant churn.

The other issue is, I think, a matter of other bad social policies. The budget and trade deficit, the sinking quality of the schools which leaves more and more folks unemployable while jobs get more and more intellectually demanding.

And there is just the reality that government at all levels takes more and more from us.

And we have made choices to trade jobs for green. It was an easy choice. Oxygen is addicting and folks get very upset when they can't get their fix.

The deal is a lot more complex than "he has his pile and it is getting bigger, my pile shrinks." What is he doing with his pile to make it big? And where have you been spending yours?

 

[sparky]

The crying never stops.

I'm just amazed at how long you babies can keep this shit up.

Attack the messenger not the message, eh?

Coward.

Where in the Constitution is the authority given Congress to investigate the difference in compensation between CEOs and workers in private industry?

Congress, under it's own authority, can hold hearings investigating an olives telepathic ability

what you might be alluding to is, does the constitution address disparity?

it does not do so directly

indirectly, one might read it into it

niether would be the point in my OP, as many known threats to national security are not going to have any constitutional reference, nor preemptive Congressional authority

Further, i find a widening disparity neither of right nor left political stripe

as niether advocates greed in it's destructive form

so , blame game aside, you can anologize disparity as a rising tide here

not good imho.......

~S~