How does envy and hate towards "rich" people..

[ilia25]

Middle class is doing just fine....

And yet, here is median household income (at 50% boundary):
1979: 44,481
2010: 49,445, or 11% increase

... and poorest household of the top 5%
1979: 124,540
2010: 180,810, or 45% increase

http://www.census.gov/prod/2011pubs/p60-239.pdf

As you can see, the incomes grew much faster at the top, resulting in rising inequality. And virtually all rise in per capita incomes for the past 30 years went to the richest households.

Some folks are hard to fool...

....then, there's you..



1. The charge is that there has been very little change in the average real income of American households over a period of decades. And there is proof of that: income adjusted for inflation rose by only 6% from 1969 to 1999…stagnation? There it is: simple proof for the simple mind… never mind.

a. You see, it is also true that the average real income per person rose by 51% over that same period!!! http://www.census.gov/prod/3/98pubs/p23-196.pdf

b. The explanation? Changes in the average number of persons per household was declining over that period! It also varies with racial and ethnic groups and with income brackets.

Yes, you've got me here! The average number of persons in a household decreased in the past 30 years from 2.8 to 2.5. Wow, it sure would explain why the incomes of the top 1% grew 40 times faster than in the median.

Or may be not?

c. Income comparisons using household statistics are far less reliable indicators of standard of living than individual income data.

So where can we see that individual income data?

2. The increases in income is partially responsible for the decreasing size of households, as it enables more to live in their own separate homes.

The keyword here is of course "partially".

b. But in high income families, the “rich,” household size is often the explanation for increased income. With 39 million in households in the lowest 20% vs. 64 million in the households with the top 20% of earnings, it’s easy to see the reason for the disparity.

I have no problem with the rich earning more than the poor. The issue is that inequality is rising over time -- and as that trend continues, what will become of this country?

c. Further, the educational backgrounds and skills of the two quintiles are far from comparable.

No, they not -- and that is the reason for taxing the rich more. We cannot all be CEO, someone has to clean the toilets too. And CEO should take home much more than a janitor so talented people have the incentives to advance their careers. But when CEO is bringing home 500 times more than a plumber, that is just ridiculous.

Tell me a single reason why setting 70% marginal tax rate for the rich is NOT the best way to pay for Medicare or social security, or defense?

 

[Cowman]

I'm surprised at how many people think that rich people are automatically better than the rest of us on account of their money.

I'm surprised at how many people think rich people are evil because there rich go figure.

Please show me statistics showing that people think rich people are evil. I don't think rich people are evil... I just think they have a burden of taxes to their country that they are more than capable of paying without any kind of hardship. Their taxes make this country great.

How do you take "not better than us" and twist it into "evil"? How about "equal", my friend. Though obviously not equal from an economical point of view.

 

[RDD_1210]

I love the irony of people who are "sick of all the class warfare" but blame all of the problems in this country on the poor.

Link?

http://www.usmessageboard.com

 

[The T]

I'm surprised at how many people think that rich people are automatically better than the rest of us on account of their money.

I'm surprised at how many people think rich people are evil because there rich go figure.

Because they worked hard...NAH...Sacrificed? NAH...Long Hours? NAH. Invested and guard thier investments? NAH...

All alien concepts to the Statist that belives all property belongs to the State.

 

[Dr.House]

I love the irony of people who are "sick of all the class warfare" but blame all of the problems in this country on the poor.

Link?

http://www.usmessageboard.com

Fail....

 

[American Horse]

Helping to solve your own problems.....I have to say I am kind of shocked at some of the hateful comments from some people towards people that are rich. Also I am puzzled by how some are selective in who they have decided to dislike, like the Romneys......So If I am to understand it correctly, it is fine to dislike a rich republican, while the same people don't have any problems with rich people like the Kennedys..

How does wanting to end the Bush Tax cuts and treat the capital gains as income equal envy and hate?

Capital Gains is earnings from capital put at risk. The Buffet rule will net the treasury about $5-billion annually. The loss of opportunities that missing capital will cost will be magnitudes larger. The only reason for doing it is to satisfy a claim to "fairness" and the motivation is envy; envy is a form of dislike felt by some as hatred, or "getting even with 'em" syndrome. It's best thought of as cutting off one's nose to spite one's face, because it's about that productive.

 

[francoHFW]

I'm surprised at how many people think that rich people are automatically better than the rest of us on account of their money.

I'm surprised at how many people think rich people are evil because there rich go figure.

Because they worked hard...NAH...Sacrificed? NAH...Long Hours? NAH. Invested and guard thier investments? NAH...

All alien concepts to the Statist that belives all property belongs to the State.

Sure, Col. West LOL!

 

[The T]

I'm surprised at how many people think rich people are evil because there rich go figure.

Because they worked hard...NAH...Sacrificed? NAH...Long Hours? NAH. Invested and guard thier investments? NAH...

All alien concepts to the Statist that belives all property belongs to the State.

Sure, Col. West LOL!

Colonel West Gracie?

Asphinctersayswhat?

 

[uscitizen]

I'm surprised at how many people think that rich people are automatically better than the rest of us on account of their money.

I'm surprised at how many people think rich people are evil because there rich go figure.

What is that the bible says about a rich man and a camel and needle?

 

[rdean]

Helping to solve your own problems.....I have to say I am kind of shocked at some of the hateful comments from some people towards people that are rich. Also I am puzzled by how some are selective in who they have decided to dislike, like the Romneys......So If I am to understand it correctly, it is fine to dislike a rich republican, while the same people don't have any problems with rich people like the Kennedys..

Since you made up a ridiculous question, you have permission to make up a ridiculous answer. Go for it!

I never made up any ridiculous question.

When I ask Republicans why they think education is for snobs, it's because they do.

When I ask Republicans why they want to turn over the country to a few wealthy, it's because they do.

When I ask Republicans why they are anti science, it's because they are.

When I ask why Republicans believe in "let him die", I really want to know why.

When I ask why the Republican Party is 90% white, I already know that answer.

So which question is "ridiculous"?

 

[snakedoc]

I'm surprised at how many people think that rich people are automatically better than the rest of us on account of their money.

I'm surprised at how many people think rich people are evil because there rich go figure.

What is that the bible says about a rich man and a camel and needle?

No idea contrary to what some on the left think not everyone who's politics lean right is a evangelical who can quote the bible chapter verse.

 

[hortysir]

Since you made up a ridiculous question, you have permission to make up a ridiculous answer. Go for it!

I never made up any ridiculous question.

When I ask Republicans why they think education is for snobs, it's because they do.

When I ask Republicans why they want to turn over the country to a few wealthy, it's because they do.

When I ask Republicans why they are anti science, it's because they are.

When I ask why Republicans believe in "let him die", I really want to know why.

When I ask why the Republican Party is 90% white, I already know that answer.

So which question is "ridiculous"?

US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum - Search Results

 

[jillian]

Helping to solve your own problems.....I have to say I am kind of shocked at some of the hateful comments from some people towards people that are rich. Also I am puzzled by how some are selective in who they have decided to dislike, like the Romneys......So If I am to understand it correctly, it is fine to dislike a rich republican, while the same people don't have any problems with rich people like the Kennedys..

who "envies" and "hates" rich people.

just what we need... another rightwingnut loon.

 

[PoliticalChic]

And yet, here is median household income (at 50% boundary):
1979: 44,481
2010: 49,445, or 11% increase

... and poorest household of the top 5%
1979: 124,540
2010: 180,810, or 45% increase

http://www.census.gov/prod/2011pubs/p60-239.pdf

As you can see, the incomes grew much faster at the top, resulting in rising inequality. And virtually all rise in per capita incomes for the past 30 years went to the richest households.

Some folks are hard to fool...

....then, there's you..



1. The charge is that there has been very little change in the average real income of American households over a period of decades. And there is proof of that: income adjusted for inflation rose by only 6% from 1969 to 1999…stagnation? There it is: simple proof for the simple mind… never mind.

a. You see, it is also true that the average real income per person rose by 51% over that same period!!! http://www.census.gov/prod/3/98pubs/p23-196.pdf

b. The explanation? Changes in the average number of persons per household was declining over that period! It also varies with racial and ethnic groups and with income brackets.

Yes, you've got me here! The average number of persons in a household decreased in the past 30 years from 2.8 to 2.5. Wow, it sure would explain why the incomes of the top 1% grew 40 times faster than in the median.

Or may be not?




So where can we see that individual income data?




The keyword here is of course "partially".

b. But in high income families, the “rich,” household size is often the explanation for increased income. With 39 million in households in the lowest 20% vs. 64 million in the households with the top 20% of earnings, it’s easy to see the reason for the disparity.

I have no problem with the rich earning more than the poor. The issue is that inequality is rising over time -- and as that trend continues, what will become of this country?

c. Further, the educational backgrounds and skills of the two quintiles are far from comparable.

No, they not -- and that is the reason for taxing the rich more. We cannot all be CEO, someone has to clean the toilets too. And CEO should take home much more than a janitor so talented people have the incentives to advance their careers. But when CEO is bringing home 500 times more than a plumber, that is just ridiculous.

Tell me a single reason why setting 70% marginal tax rate for the rich is NOT the best way to pay for Medicare or social security, or defense?

1. "The issue is that inequality...."

No it isn't.


What someone else earns is none of your darn business.

2. "So where can we see that individual income data?"
Ask 'em for their income tax forms.
When do you post yours?

3. "The issue is that inequality...."
Totally false and ignorant.
The more you work, the more you make.

a. As productivity and skills increase, workers earn more. Productivity of workers in competitive markets is what determines the earnings of most workers; and it is not an accident that labor earns about 70% of the total output of the American economy, and capital earns about 30%.

In Alan Reynold’s “Income and Wealth,” he studied the data, and found the following. Certainly the top fifth of households has a far greater proportion of same, but it also has six times as many full-time workers as the bottom fifth, heavily composed of two-earner couples with older children or other relatives who work. The bottom fifth is heavily composed of aged or younger couples, the retired or the still in school. Also, some in the bottom fifth because they are part of the underground economy, or in crime, so income is not reported. Or suffer addictions which preclude work.

b. In 2004, 56.4% of households in the bottom fifth featured no work by anyone for the entire year.
HINC-05--Part 1

c.The total number of full time, year round workers in the bottom fifth for 2004 was less than 3 million…which compares to 16.4 million in the top fifth of households. Ibid.

The difference in income does not reflect inequality, but rather, productivity. The fact that the lowest fifth are neither starving, nor living in the streets reflects the intrinsic generosity of our society, and the transfer of incomes via government programs. 80% of income in the bottom fifth is from such transfers; it is only 2% for the top fifth.


4. But...if you want to fight 'inequality,' here's some:
The top 1% earn 17% of the money.... but pay 38% of the taxes.....
How come you're not incensed over that????

5.Now the big question.

How did you manage to get to this point without doing any of your own thinking?

 

[citizenal]

Helping to solve your own problems.....I have to say I am kind of shocked at some of the hateful comments from some people towards people that are rich. Also I am puzzled by how some are selective in who they have decided to dislike, like the Romneys......So If I am to understand it correctly, it is fine to dislike a rich republican, while the same people don't have any problems with rich people like the Kennedys..

I know a few rich people. Some came by their money through ingenuity and hard work. However, most did by screwing somebody else. Maybe this is reason so some people make hateful comments about them?

The Kennedy's got rich running rum during the roaring twenties. This is why most people like them, not to mention that John F. Kennedy stands head and shoulders above every other President since the beginning of the last century.

 

[zeke]

I used to know some pretty rich people. During the mortgage boom, many people make real good money.

Of course, some of the millioniares of the mortgage business are under investagation for fraud and theft and things like that.

Should they be applauded because they are rich. Even though they "earned" their money taking advantage of a situation that they helped create?

You all proud of Franklin Raines of Fannie Mae? He is rich. How about Loyld Blankenship of Chase. He is rich. Lots of rich bankers who got bailed out by the gyvmint. You all proud of them? They are rich.

 

[FloridaGirl]

Helping to solve your own problems.....I have to say I am kind of shocked at some of the hateful comments from some people towards people that are rich. Also I am puzzled by how some are selective in who they have decided to dislike, like the Romneys......So If I am to understand it correctly, it is fine to dislike a rich republican, while the same people don't have any problems with rich people like the Kennedys..

who "envies" and "hates" rich people.

just what we need... another rightwingnut loon.

Your little comment just proves my point. How dare I point out the double standard kind of a thing. Maybe you should look yourself in the mirror before you start to insult other people.

 

[Seawytch]

I'm surprised at how many people think that rich people are automatically better than the rest of us on account of their money.

I'm surprised at how many people think rich people are evil because there rich go figure.

What is that the bible says about a rich man and a camel and needle?

Nothing but net! Three pointer at the buzzer!

And that Eisenhower...what a hater!

 

[initforme]

"The more you work, the more you make."

In some instances yes. I know of many people in which both parents are working 2 jobs apiece and they arent getting ahead. One is a snowplow driver that clears the roads in the winter. But the uber wealthy are the first to complain if the roads are plowed as well as they think they should be. The guy gets paid a pittance for the hours he puts in. He'll never be rich and there are some wealthy who believe he makes too much as it is. Thats what bugs me. They believe he shouldnt have his health insurance even though they make 10x what he does. Those are the people who'v voices need to be squelched.

 

[PoliticalChic]

"The more you work, the more you make."

In some instances yes. I know of many people in which both parents are working 2 jobs apiece and they arent getting ahead. One is a snowplow driver that clears the roads in the winter. But the uber wealthy are the first to complain if the roads are plowed as well as they think they should be. The guy gets paid a pittance for the hours he puts in. He'll never be rich and there are some wealthy who believe he makes too much as it is. Thats what bugs me. They believe he shouldnt have his health insurance even though they make 10x what he does. Those are the people who'v voices need to be squelched.

1. "The guy gets paid a pittance for the hours he puts in."

a. Go back to school.

b. Get a better job.

c. Move to where they pay more.

or...

d. Bellyache the way you are doing....sure is a time and effort saver.


2. What a coincidence that you appear just in time to represent the following from chapter 32 of "The Secret Knowledge," by David Mamet"

"The adolescent, the Marxist, and the Liberal dream of “fairness,” brought about by the state. Silly. This would mean usurping the society decision that the skilled worker is entitled to higher pay than the unskilled. This decision is never pronounced by any authority other than the free market. It was arrived at via the interaction of human beings perfectly capable of ordering their own affairs.

Government cannot and will not correct itself- thus the necessity for elections. But society, convened as the free market, can and des correct itself…and quickly, ‘else the risk of impoverishment.

If the Leftist is interested in a more ‘fair’ redistribution of wealth, let him vote for lower taxes, and then he can distribute his now larger share of his wealth to the lesser compensated folks.

a. Illustrative of reality is the fact that the Leftist refrains from paying above the stated price for goods and services…he wants, as everyone else does, competition between said services. Only then does he stand a chance of getting a “fair” price. In his own enterprise, he strives to improve quality or lower price…’else his potential customers will take their business to others. Unless he has the power of government!"