Economic Inequality: The Greatest Conflict in US Society Today.

[georgephillip]

According to a recent survey by the Pew Research Center about two-thirds of Americans now believe there are "strong conflicts" between rich and poor in the US. That share represents a 50 percent increase from a 2009 survey in which 47% of those polled said there were strong conflicts between economic classes.

For the first time conflict between rich and poor eclipsed tensions over race and immigration in the survey which polled 2,048 adults between December 6 to December 19.

"Independents, whose votes will be fought over by both parties, showed the single largest increase in perceptions of conflicts between rich and poor, up 23 percentage points, to 68 percent, compared with an 18-point rise among Democrats and a 17-point rise for Republicans.

"Sixty-eight percent of independents believe there are strong class conflicts, just below the 73 percent of Democrats who do. (The survey’s margin of sampling error is plus or minus three percentage points for results based on the total sample.)

“'The story for me was the consistency of the change,'... 'Everyone sees more conflict.'”

Occupy That!

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/12/us/more-conflict-seen-between-rich-and-poor-survey-finds.html

 

[Chris]

Occupy Wall Street completely changed the national conversation.

And now the Republicans are putting up a candidate who is a poster child for everything that is wrong with our tax system.

Thank you, Republicans!

 

[georgephillip]

Occupy Wall Street completely changed the national conversation.

And now the Republicans are putting up a candidate who is a poster child for everything that is wrong with our tax system.

Thank you, Republicans!

Let's hope the Republicans drag out their primary circus until Tampa.
If not Romney or Newt, would they nominate a compromise candidate who isn't taking part in the primaries?

 

[imbalance]

How about you dumb leftists crack open an intro to microeconomics book and learn about equilibrium prices and supply/demand for unskilled workers instead of crying to yourselves about how unfair the world is.

 

[georgephillip]

How about you dumb leftists crack open an intro to microeconomics book and learn about equilibrium prices and supply/demand for unskilled workers instead of crying to yourselves about how unfair the world is.

When will retarded righties catch up to the economics of poverty:

"The survey attributed the change, in part, to 'underlying shifts in the distribution of wealth in American society,' citing a finding by the Census Bureau that the share of wealth held by the top 10 percent of the population increased to 56 percent in 2009, from 49 percent in 2005."

The world is unfair because the rich consolidate state power and use it for their own selfish ends, ask Adam Smith if you're still confused.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/12/us/more-conflict-seen-between-rich-and-poor-survey-finds.html?_r=1

 

[imbalance]

How about you dumb leftists crack open an intro to microeconomics book and learn about equilibrium prices and supply/demand for unskilled workers instead of crying to yourselves about how unfair the world is.

When will retarded righties catch up to the economics of poverty:

"The survey attributed the change, in part, to 'underlying shifts in the distribution of wealth in American society,' citing a finding by the Census Bureau that the share of wealth held by the top 10 percent of the population increased to 56 percent in 2009, from 49 percent in 2005."

The world is unfair because the rich consolidate state power and use it for their own selfish ends, ask Adam Smith if you're still confused.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/12/us/more-conflict-seen-between-rich-and-poor-survey-finds.html?_r=1

Yes, we all know there's growing income inequality, but neither you nor the lame article you linked can explain the reasons for that. You know the 'what' but you don't know the 'why' so you just assume the evil rich are to blame.

A simple understanding of the laws of supply and demand go a long way in explaining the root of wage inequality. Over the past few decades the high-tech sector of the US economy has expanded as the manufacturing sector has contracted. Partly due to illegal immigration, the supply of unskilled workers has inflated over these decades while the demand for unskilled workers has fallen. Any time supply rises as demand falls the equilibrium price (wage) drops.

Meanwhile, demand for skilled workers has risen while the supply has not kept pace, hence the equilibrium price (wage) has increased. And by skilled workers I don't mean someone who spent six years getting a liberal arts degree in ethnic studies; we have to import engineers from Asia and other parts of the world to try meet the demand for these skilled workers yet we still have a shortage.

/THREAD

 

[georgephillip]

We import skilled workers from Asia because they work for a fraction of what US graduates demand and are entitled to. Any consequences of "illegal" immigration stem from the richest 1% bribing Republicans AND Democrats for "Free" Trade agreements that plunder the economies of the immigrants' home countries and result in massive waves of desperate migrants seeking some way of feeding their families.

Likewise our decline in manufacturing stems from our 1% bribing politicians for tax and trade policies that favor outsourcing millions of US middle class jobs to slave wage states like China. That's something that didn't happen in states like Germany where labor unions have voting members sitting on the boards of directors of the corporations they work for.

This explains why the richest 1% of Germans take home the same share of German income today that they banked in the 1970s while the American 1% have nearly tripled their share of US national income during that same time period.

In 1947 the median family income was $23,400, that doubled to $47,400 in 1977 and reached $58,400 in 2005. Compare that to incomes of those in the 99.99th percentile who saw their earnings swell from $2,000,000 in the late 70s to $10,000,000 in 2009.

Which economic group has had more influence on US tax and trade policies over that time?

Any remedy to problems like these probably starts with erecting a wall of separation between private wealth and the state, something the evil rich would likely oppose since much of their wealth would be taxed into productive as opposed to speculative pursuits.

Income Inequality News - The New York Times

 

[Katzndogz]

Pay people to do nothing or they will get mad.

The most sensible answer is to start spanking them really hard.

The 99% is about to make their voice heard. The gutter slugs will get what's coming to them.

 

[Seawytch]

According to a recent survey by the Pew Research Center about two-thirds of Americans now believe there are "strong conflicts" between rich and poor in the US. That share represents a 50 percent increase from a 2009 survey in which 47% of those polled said there were strong conflicts between economic classes.

For the first time conflict between rich and poor eclipsed tensions over race and immigration in the survey which polled 2,048 adults between December 6 to December 19.

"Independents, whose votes will be fought over by both parties, showed the single largest increase in perceptions of conflicts between rich and poor, up 23 percentage points, to 68 percent, compared with an 18-point rise among Democrats and a 17-point rise for Republicans.

"Sixty-eight percent of independents believe there are strong class conflicts, just below the 73 percent of Democrats who do. (The survey’s margin of sampling error is plus or minus three percentage points for results based on the total sample.)

“'The story for me was the consistency of the change,'... 'Everyone sees more conflict.'”

Occupy That!

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/12/us/more-conflict-seen-between-rich-and-poor-survey-finds.html

And yet the GOP thinks they can win the election by representing the 1% to the detriment of the 99%.

 

[tenthertoo]

People are becoming "sensitized" to a differentiation between income from "work" and income from investment and are being deluged with the perception that the latter is evil. Of course "work" is portrayed as including politicians, community organizers, union leaders, and other agitators who are presented as the righteous ones. . Persons engaged in activities supporting the traditional "open market" philosophy are lumped in with the "investment class" and are vilified.

It appeals to the basest of human nature and is therefore quite effective.

 

[georgephillip]

Pay people to do nothing or they will get mad.

The most sensible answer is to start spanking them really hard.

The 99% is about to make their voice heard. The gutter slugs will get what's coming to them.

You're confusing Mitt with OWS when it comes to that spanking.

68% of political independents currently believe conflicts between rich and poor pose the biggest threat to this country. You can thank Mitt and OWS for that.

The real gutter slugs live on Wall Street, and they will probably do just fine regardless of which corporate tool wins the White House next November.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Occupy Wall Street completely changed the national conversation.

And now the Republicans are putting up a candidate who is a poster child for everything that is wrong with our tax system.

Thank you, Republicans!

Let's hope the Republicans drag out their primary circus until Tampa.
If not Romney or Newt, would they nominate a compromise candidate who isn't taking part in the primaries?

As it seems 'none of the above' is leading the pack of would-be nominees an open primary could become a blood bath and potentially lead to a restructuring or splintering of Republican Party. The only thing the factions within the party share is hatred for the Democrats and in particular for the President.

 

[WillowTree]

According to a recent survey by the Pew Research Center about two-thirds of Americans now believe there are "strong conflicts" between rich and poor in the US. That share represents a 50 percent increase from a 2009 survey in which 47% of those polled said there were strong conflicts between economic classes.

For the first time conflict between rich and poor eclipsed tensions over race and immigration in the survey which polled 2,048 adults between December 6 to December 19.

"Independents, whose votes will be fought over by both parties, showed the single largest increase in perceptions of conflicts between rich and poor, up 23 percentage points, to 68 percent, compared with an 18-point rise among Democrats and a 17-point rise for Republicans.

"Sixty-eight percent of independents believe there are strong class conflicts, just below the 73 percent of Democrats who do. (The survey’s margin of sampling error is plus or minus three percentage points for results based on the total sample.)

“'The story for me was the consistency of the change,'... 'Everyone sees more conflict.'”

Occupy That!

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/12/us/more-conflict-seen-between-rich-and-poor-survey-finds.html

obummer's class warfare is working huh? ain't ewe proud?

 

[Old_Liberal]

We import skilled workers from Asia because they work for a fraction of what US graduates demand and are entitled to. Any consequences of "illegal" immigration stem from the richest 1% bribing Republicans AND Democrats for "Free" Trade agreements that plunder the economies of the immigrants' home countries and result in massive waves of desperate migrants seeking some way of feeding their families.

Likewise our decline in manufacturing stems from our 1% bribing politicians for tax and trade policies that favor outsourcing millions of US middle class jobs to slave wage states like China. That's something that didn't happen in states like Germany where labor unions have voting members sitting on the boards of directors of the corporations they work for.

This explains why the richest 1% of Germans take home the same share of German income today that they banked in the 1970s while the American 1% have nearly tripled their share of US national income during that same time period.

In 1947 the median family income was $23,400, that doubled to $47,400 in 1977 and reached $58,400 in 2005. Compare that to incomes of those in the 99.99th percentile who saw their earnings swell from $2,000,000 in the late 70s to $10,000,000 in 2009.

Which economic group has had more influence on US tax and trade policies over that time?

Any remedy to problems like these probably starts with erecting a wall of separation between private wealth and the state, something the evil rich would likely oppose since much of their wealth would be taxed into productive as opposed to speculative pursuits.

There is indeed a monumental problem with the income disparity that has been creeping up with the return of conservatives to power, starting in 1980. Take a look at the state of the economy. This is what the conservative economic model looks like. This is what free trade and bank deregs gave us. Only an idiot cannot see it.

Our old economic model created history's largest middle class. What is this new one doing? Well it is gonna cause more disorder and chaos that we have seen since the Great Depression. What happens when the unemployment checks run out? With no jobs for those folks? You better button down the hatches and hang on. The future don't look so nice,and who knows what lies on the other side? It is times like these, that make socialism look good to some, although not to me. Yet this is what inevitably happens when the gov't no longer seeks to build up the middle, and instead allows the natural course of capitalism to proceed.

You want to know what a less fettered capitalism leads to? Look outside! Yet the Republicans want more of it! Personal liberty! Well, when half of america is in poverty or about to be in poverty, personal liberty over a job isn't a hard choice to make. Folks have to eat. And when they dont, they get pissed off and start hanging the folks they think are at fault. The rich folks better hire some more security guards and expand the police force is all I can say. The shit will hit the fan, and you can take that to the fucking bank.

 

[Wry Catcher]

People are becoming "sensitized" to a differentiation between income from "work" and income from investment and are being deluged with the perception that the latter is evil. Of course "work" is portrayed as including politicians, community organizers, union leaders, and other agitators who are presented as the righteous ones. . Persons engaged in activities supporting the traditional "open market" philosophy are lumped in with the "investment class" and are vilified.

It appeals to the basest of human nature and is therefore quite effective.

For fun, let's define "Work":

noun
1.
exertion or effort directed to produce or accomplish something; labor; toil.

2.
something on which exertion or labor is expended; a task or undertaking:

3.
productive or operative activity.

4.
employment, as in some form of industry, especially as a means of earning one's livelihood: to look for work.

5.
one's place of employment: Don't phone him at work.


6.
materials, things, etc., on which one is working or is to work.

7.
the result of exertion, labor, or activity; a deed or performance.

8.
a product of exertion, labor, or activity: musical works.

9.
an engineering structure, as a building or bridge.

10.
a building, wall, trench, or the like, constructed or made as a means of fortification.

Nothing in this dictionary.com definition suggests destroying something. I use as an example the Sports Authority theme. In our region, and I suspect in yours, Sports Authority has replaced a number of smaller sporting goods stores, in many cases taken over the same building. Does Romney count as jobs created a person who simply changed jobs and now works in the same occupation as a 'new' job? You betcha.

 

[georgephillip]

According to a recent survey by the Pew Research Center about two-thirds of Americans now believe there are "strong conflicts" between rich and poor in the US. That share represents a 50 percent increase from a 2009 survey in which 47% of those polled said there were strong conflicts between economic classes.

For the first time conflict between rich and poor eclipsed tensions over race and immigration in the survey which polled 2,048 adults between December 6 to December 19.

"Independents, whose votes will be fought over by both parties, showed the single largest increase in perceptions of conflicts between rich and poor, up 23 percentage points, to 68 percent, compared with an 18-point rise among Democrats and a 17-point rise for Republicans.

"Sixty-eight percent of independents believe there are strong class conflicts, just below the 73 percent of Democrats who do. (The survey’s margin of sampling error is plus or minus three percentage points for results based on the total sample.)

“'The story for me was the consistency of the change,'... 'Everyone sees more conflict.'”

Occupy That!

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/12/us/more-conflict-seen-between-rich-and-poor-survey-finds.html

And yet the GOP thinks they can win the election by representing the 1% to the detriment of the 99%.

Millions of eligible US voters routinely see no one worth voting FOR, even in presidential elections.

If that 30%-40% of the total electorate could be convinced to vote AGAINST every Republican AND Democrat incumbent running for reelection next November, the corporate strangle hold on US politics would be greatly weakened.

Many states already have established third party candidates appearing on their ballots.
The 1% will vote Republican OR Democrat automatically.
The 99% could trump that by FLUSHING a hundred incumbents from DC in a single news cycle.

 

[WillowTree]

what will all ewe libtards do when the investors stop investing in America? huh? whine bout it?

 

[Katzndogz]

We import workers from Asia because Americans are too unskilled and uneducated to do the kinds of work necessary for today's market.

 

[Katzndogz]

what will all ewe libtards do when the investors stop investing in America? huh? whine bout it?

As America descends into a third world communist style dictatorship, the left finds this GOOD. It's what they want to happen.

 

[tenthertoo]

People are becoming "sensitized" to a differentiation between income from "work" and income from investment and are being deluged with the perception that the latter is evil. Of course "work" is portrayed as including politicians, community organizers, union leaders, and other agitators who are presented as the righteous ones. . Persons engaged in activities supporting the traditional "open market" philosophy are lumped in with the "investment class" and are vilified.

It appeals to the basest of human nature and is therefore quite effective.

For fun, let's define "Work":

noun
1.
exertion or effort directed to produce or accomplish something; labor; toil.

2.
something on which exertion or labor is expended; a task or undertaking:

3.
productive or operative activity.

4.
employment, as in some form of industry, especially as a means of earning one's livelihood: to look for work.

5.
one's place of employment: Don't phone him at work.


6.
materials, things, etc., on which one is working or is to work.

7.
the result of exertion, labor, or activity; a deed or performance.

8.
a product of exertion, labor, or activity: musical works.

9.
an engineering structure, as a building or bridge.

10.
a building, wall, trench, or the like, constructed or made as a means of fortification.

Nothing in this dictionary.com definition suggests destroying something. I use as an example the Sports Authority theme. In our region, and I suspect in yours, Sports Authority has replaced a number of smaller sporting goods stores, in many cases taken over the same building. Does Romney count as jobs created a person who simply changed jobs and now works in the same occupation as a 'new' job? You betcha.

To the liberals "work" is what they say it is (for the moment). To liberals everything is what they say it is.