"Income Inequality": So What?

[Procrustes Stretched]

To the Libs reading this I ask: First, why is "income inequality" a problem? Second, What would you suggest as a solution? Third, What gives Government the power or the right to effect this solution? (Please refer to the United States Constitution)

Cause it is and has been widening as well as the increasing numbers in and even below poverty. Income inequality was in fact created by the very scam artists that are now in the upper crust of society.

The more one makes the more a % they pay in taxes to help the folks who they stole $ from. After all if it weren't for this grand pyramid scheme that is skewed in their favor and NOT capitalism, they wouldn't be well off.

The govt was never meant to be run by any minority, especially the upper 1% who now own what was once We The People's govt and is now an oligarchy.

Yes, please do refer to the Consitution.

IOW you can't answer the question.
Why is income inequality a problem?

Maybe some guy named Adam Smith can help you out here?


"But what improves the circumstances of the greater part can never be regarded as an inconvenience to the whole. No society can surely be flourishing and happy, of which the far greater part of the members are poor and miserable."




and "Where wages are high, accordingly, we shall always find the workmen more active, diligent, and expeditious than where they are low."

 

[Fordsflylow]

You think Romney isn't smart and hasn't worked hard?

OK, in addition to being a loser, you're also stupid. I think we see a pattern emerging here.

That is EXACTLY what I'm stating! He's a rich punk and born a rich punk who has never worked a day in his life in comparison to blue collar workers. Why would you defend such a crook unless of course you are a crook also.

Nope, not even close to being stupid, but do wholeheartedly disagree with your long line of knee-deep bs. Nice try though, just the same!

 

[hortysir]

"Income Inequality" has been the most often-heard catchphrase for today's Progressives...

WRONG!!!

I'm no great fan of all things progressive, or of most Progressives, but I'll rise to their defense here. Income inequality as a term, as you spin it, looks nothing like the term used by most credible and reasonable people.

The wealth gap. The income of the highest-paid Americans has soared while the income of the rest of Americans has grown little. The widening gap is cause for concern in all economic systems, but especially the economic system of a Capitalist Democracy, because killing off the middle class will make America a banana republic.

To have a middle class, there cannot be too wide a gap between those at the top and the rest of society, for when that happens there is just the wealthy and the struggling: the haves and the have nots.

America in the late 19th and early 20th centuries was not so great a place to live for most Americans and immigrants, pre-FDR. Anyone who wants to argue that is welcome to have their butts kicked and handed to them on a plate of crow.

Without these "haves and have-nots" the progressive left would have no pawns to play against each other.

 

[kwc57]

To the Libs reading this I ask: First, why is "income inequality" a problem? Second, What would you suggest as a solution? Third, What gives Government the power or the right to effect this solution? (Please refer to the United States Constitution)

Cause it is and has been widening as well as the increasing numbers in and even below poverty. Income inequality was in fact created by the very scam artists that are now in the upper crust of society.

The more one makes the more a % they pay in taxes to help the folks who they stole $ from to begin with. After all if it weren't for this grand pyramid scheme that is skewed in their favor and NOT capitalism, they wouldn't be well off.

The govt was never meant to be run by any minority, especially the upper 1% who now own what was once We The People's govt and is now an oligarchy.

Yes, please do refer to the Consitution.

I have to call bullshit on that statement. Stole? Really? What exactly has your employer stole from you? It's his company, his product, his risk and his profit. He's paying you a going rate for your time and experience. Somes jobs pay more than others because any moron can dig a hole with a shovel while it takes a very intelligent person with years of training to do brain surgery. There is no theft going on. Theft implies your company is taking something away from you that you owned. Are you being forced to work for your employer? Can you not seek employment elsewhere that doesn't "steal" from their employees? Are you incapable of starting your own company where you won't be stolen from? You liberal need to quit using the term theft if you don't know how to use it correctly in a sentence.

 

[Ernie S.]

"Income Inequality" has been the most often-heard catchphrase for today's Progressives...

WRONG!!!

I'm no great fan of all things progressive, or of most Progressives, but I'll rise to their defense here. Income inequality as a term, as you spin it, looks nothing like the term used by most credible and reasonable people.

The wealth gap. The income of the highest-paid Americans has soared while the income of the rest of Americans has grown little. The widening gap is cause for concern in all economic systems, but especially the economic system of a Capitalist Democracy, because killing off the middle class will make America a banana republic.

To have a middle class, there cannot be too wide a gap between those at the top and the rest of society, for when that happens there is just the wealthy and the struggling: the haves and the have nots.

America in the late 19th and early 20th centuries was not so great a place to live for most Americans and immigrants, pre-FDR. Anyone who wants to argue that is welcome to have their butts kicked and handed to them on a plate of crow.

No one is killing off the middle class but the middle class themselves. If your income is stagnant, look to your worth in the "system"
If you're still working making wagons for Conestoga, you need to adapt. People aren't buying covered wagons and there are already more than enough wheelwrights to fill what little demand there is. People that move up and out of the middle class are those who learn new skills, develop new products or create a demand for their services, not the guy that thinks the government should subsidize the prairie schooner industry.

 

[Fordsflylow]

How about those koch punks. Did they work harder and smarter OR did they have everything handed to them on a silver platter?

Someone had to buy the silver platter. Are you one of those who think when you die, the government should get all of your assets?

Not all but much of. They didn't scam...er...earn it! Name me all those rich kids who grew to be adults and did well for others with the money they've been handed? You know, to use as a healthy example of how it is good they get to keep the riches dada or mama made. Please do!

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

"Income Inequality" has been the most often-heard catchphrase for today's Progressives...

WRONG!!!

I'm no great fan of all things progressive, or of most Progressives, but I'll rise to their defense here. Income inequality as a term, as you spin it, looks nothing like the term used by most credible and reasonable people.

The wealth gap. The income of the highest-paid Americans has soared while the income of the rest of Americans has grown little. The widening gap is cause for concern in all economic systems, but especially the economic system of a Capitalist Democracy, because killing off the middle class will make America a banana republic.

To have a middle class, there cannot be too wide a gap between those at the top and the rest of society, for when that happens there is just the wealthy and the struggling: the haves and the have nots.

America in the late 19th and early 20th centuries was not so great a place to live for most Americans and immigrants, pre-FDR. Anyone who wants to argue that is welcome to have their butts kicked and handed to them on a plate of crow.

Without these "haves and have-nots" the progressive left would have no pawns to play against each other.

and there would be no great economic engines in the Western world

Maybe some guy named Adam Smith can help you out here?

"But what improves the circumstances of the greater part can never be regarded as an inconvenience to the whole. No society can surely be flourishing and happy, of which the far greater part of the members are poor and miserable."

and "Where wages are high, accordingly, we shall always find the workmen more active, diligent, and expeditious than where they are low."
__________________

 

[kwc57]

You think Romney isn't smart and hasn't worked hard?

OK, in addition to being a loser, you're also stupid. I think we see a pattern emerging here.

That is EXACTLY what I'm stating! He's a rich punk and born a rich punk who has never worked a day in his life in comparison to blue collar workers. Why would you defend such a crook unless of course you are a crook also.

Nope, not even close to being stupid, but do wholeheartedly disagree with your long line of knee-deep bs. Nice try though, just the same!

You are aware that no one ever got rich "working hard" (physical labor), aren't you? The guy who designs a skyscraper that won't fall down is going to make more money than the guy who lays the brick. Is the architect a rich punk who never "worked" and stole the wealth from the mason?

 

[kwc57]

How about those koch punks. Did they work harder and smarter OR did they have everything handed to them on a silver platter?

Someone had to buy the silver platter. Are you one of those who think when you die, the government should get all of your assets?

Not all but much of. They didn't scam...er...earn it! Name me all those rich kids who grew to be adults and did well for others with the money they've been handed? You know, to use as a healthy example of how it is good they get to keep the riches dada or mama made. Please do!

So you see a problem with parents leaving their wealth for their children just like they would a couch or dining room table? Really? Shouldn't the person who built that wealth be able to say what happens to it when they are gone? Tell the class, why should the government be entitled to confiscate it?

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

"Income Inequality" has been the most often-heard catchphrase for today's Progressives...

WRONG!!!

I'm no great fan of all things progressive, or of most Progressives, but I'll rise to their defense here. Income inequality as a term, as you spin it, looks nothing like the term used by most credible and reasonable people.

The wealth gap. The income of the highest-paid Americans has soared while the income of the rest of Americans has grown little. The widening gap is cause for concern in all economic systems, but especially the economic system of a Capitalist Democracy, because killing off the middle class will make America a banana republic.

To have a middle class, there cannot be too wide a gap between those at the top and the rest of society, for when that happens there is just the wealthy and the struggling: the haves and the have nots.

America in the late 19th and early 20th centuries was not so great a place to live for most Americans and immigrants, pre-FDR. Anyone who wants to argue that is welcome to have their butts kicked and handed to them on a plate of crow.

No one is killing off the middle class but the middle class themselves. If your income is stagnant, look to your worth in the "system"

If you're still working making wagons for Conestoga, you need to adapt. People aren't buying covered wagons and there are already more than enough wheelwrights to fill what little demand there is. People that move up and out of the middle class are those who learn new skills, develop new products or create a demand for their services, not the guy that thinks the government should subsidize the prairie schooner industry.

In the real world, what you claim is hooey. Your ability to live in a world of theory and principle is admirable, but to attempt to impose that world of yours onto the real world is

The overwhelming majority of people do not work in places where improving ones skills and acquiring new ones is going to happen.

ex: Everyone who works for GM. What do they all do? Quit? Go to school? Are you mad? Create a demand for services? What do you propose everyone go into marketing?

I agree that individuals should try to learn new skills, develop new products, but that is no way to form an economic and jobs policy. Applying the micro, what works with individuals to the macro plan is just plain stupid. Apples and oranges

 

[Cecilie1200]

It's a non issue. Totally. Completely. The gov't might as well try to make everyone equally good at playing the piano. Inequality comes about because some people are smarter and work harder than other people. Period.
This is unlike some countries where inequality stems from crony capitalism and family ties.
North Korea probably has the most income equality out there--everyone is miserable and dirt poor.

Even in the cases of someone just getting luckier than others, I still fail to see why that's the government's job to "fix". I don't notice them doing anything to "fix" it when one person wins the lottery and all the other millions of people who bought tickets didn't. I don't see them going out to the casinos and mandating that everyone win or lose at exactly the same rate. Nor, of course, do I think they should.

 

[Cecilie1200]

In your dreams maybe!

I'm sorry you're one of those people too stupid or lazy to get to the top.

...and you would know how exactly? Folks like you are downers!

Sorry you find the reality of having to actually work and achieve for what you get such a "downer", but none of us is your mommy, and we don't feel obligated to make you feel better about being a loser.

 

[Ernie S.]

How about those koch punks. Did they work harder and smarter OR did they have everything handed to them on a silver platter?

Someone had to buy the silver platter. Are you one of those who think when you die, the government should get all of your assets?

Not all but much of. They didn't scam...er...earn it! Name me all those rich kids who grew to be adults and did well for others with the money they've been handed? You know, to use as a healthy example of how it is good they get to keep the riches dada or mama made. Please do!

Did YOU earn it? Did Government?
It is not my responsibility, or that of government to "do well for you" It is your responsibility to do well for yourself and your children. If you can't do that building wooden wheels for covered wagons, get some new skills and man up. I'm frankly, pretty fucking tired of carrying your lazy ass around. Shit or get off the pot and get the hell out of my wallet.

 

[Cecilie1200]

I guess in the world according to rabbi, folks like romney, who were born with a silver spoon in their mouth and live a life of privilege, work hard and are automatically smarter. Is that correct?

Are you attempting to say that Mitt Romney has not worked or achieved anything in his lifre, but merely sat back and enjoyed himself while drawing off of a trust fund or inheritance?

Sorry, Sparkles, but you don't get to blame your shit-sandwich life on the fact that your parents neglected to leave you a big inheritance.

 

[Ernie S.]

WRONG!!!

I'm no great fan of all things progressive, or of most Progressives, but I'll rise to their defense here. Income inequality as a term, as you spin it, looks nothing like the term used by most credible and reasonable people.

The wealth gap. The income of the highest-paid Americans has soared while the income of the rest of Americans has grown little. The widening gap is cause for concern in all economic systems, but especially the economic system of a Capitalist Democracy, because killing off the middle class will make America a banana republic.

To have a middle class, there cannot be too wide a gap between those at the top and the rest of society, for when that happens there is just the wealthy and the struggling: the haves and the have nots.

America in the late 19th and early 20th centuries was not so great a place to live for most Americans and immigrants, pre-FDR. Anyone who wants to argue that is welcome to have their butts kicked and handed to them on a plate of crow.

No one is killing off the middle class but the middle class themselves. If your income is stagnant, look to your worth in the "system"

If you're still working making wagons for Conestoga, you need to adapt. People aren't buying covered wagons and there are already more than enough wheelwrights to fill what little demand there is. People that move up and out of the middle class are those who learn new skills, develop new products or create a demand for their services, not the guy that thinks the government should subsidize the prairie schooner industry.

In the real world, what you claim is hooey. Your ability to live in a world of theory and principle is admirable, but to attempt to impose that world of yours onto the real world is

The overwhelming majority of people do not work in places where improving ones skills and acquiring new ones is going to happen.

ex: Everyone who works for GM. What do they all do? Quit? Go to school? Are you mad? Create a demand for services? What do you propose everyone go into marketing?

I agree that individuals should try to learn new skills, develop new products, but that is no way to form an economic and jobs policy. Applying the micro, what works with individuals to the macro plan is just plain stupid. Apples and oranges

Of course, not everyone is going to become the next Bill Gates, but it is not my fault or the fault of government, if you don't. It is government's duty to ensure equal opportunity, not equal rewards.
I have no desire for people to be poor. Poor people can't afford to buy my products. I have no control over your wallet. That's all on you, pal.

 

[The Rabbi]

You think Romney isn't smart and hasn't worked hard?

OK, in addition to being a loser, you're also stupid. I think we see a pattern emerging here.

That is EXACTLY what I'm stating! He's a rich punk and born a rich punk who has never worked a day in his life in comparison to blue collar workers. Why would you defend such a crook unless of course you are a crook also.

Nope, not even close to being stupid, but do wholeheartedly disagree with your long line of knee-deep bs. Nice try though, just the same!

OK, so Romney never worked at Bain, he never had anything to do with the Olympics, he was never governor of Mass.
I'd like for you to meet reality sometime.

 

[Cecilie1200]

You think Romney isn't smart and hasn't worked hard?

OK, in addition to being a loser, you're also stupid. I think we see a pattern emerging here.

That is EXACTLY what I'm stating! He's a rich punk and born a rich punk who has never worked a day in his life in comparison to blue collar workers. Why would you defend such a crook unless of course you are a crook also.

Nope, not even close to being stupid, but do wholeheartedly disagree with your long line of knee-deep bs. Nice try though, just the same!

Yeah, if you don't spend your whole life breaking your back, digging ditches for minimum wage, you don't really work. People like Ford don't hold with all that "thinking" nonsense.

Any time you want to prove that Romney is a "crook", you go right ahead. I'm sure we'll all be mightily amused by your attempts to actually employ your brain for once. And FYI, "crook" is not defined as "doing things I'm too stupid to do".

 

[kwc57]

View attachment 19869

 

[kwc57]

You think Romney isn't smart and hasn't worked hard?

OK, in addition to being a loser, you're also stupid. I think we see a pattern emerging here.

That is EXACTLY what I'm stating! He's a rich punk and born a rich punk who has never worked a day in his life in comparison to blue collar workers. Why would you defend such a crook unless of course you are a crook also.

Nope, not even close to being stupid, but do wholeheartedly disagree with your long line of knee-deep bs. Nice try though, just the same!

OK, so Romney never worked at Bain, he never had anything to do with the Olympics, he was never governor of Mass.
I'd like for you to meet reality sometime.

Now, now Rabbi........none of those things are "hard". You have to come home with sore muscles and be physically tired to qualify for working "hard". Of course, you'll never get rich that way, but by golly, you'll have worked hard and had your wealth stolen by the guy in the office.

 

[Fordsflylow]

The more one makes the more a % they pay in taxes to help the folks who they stole $ from to begin with. After all if it weren't for this grand pyramid scheme that is skewed in their favor and NOT capitalism, they wouldn't be well off.

I have to call bullshit on that statement. Stole? Really? What exactly has your employer stole from you? It's his company, his product, his risk and his profit. He's paying you a going rate for your time and experience. Somes jobs pay more than others because any moron can dig a hole with a shovel while it takes a very intelligent person with years of training to do brain surgery. There is no theft going on. Theft implies your company is taking something away from you that you owned. Are you being forced to work for your employer? Can you not seek employment elsewhere that doesn't "steal" from their employees? Are you incapable of starting your own company where you won't be stolen from? You liberal need to quit using the term theft if you don't know how to use it correctly in a sentence.

Call it all you want. Freedom of speech and all Ya, stole AND continue to steal! Didn't stutter! My past employers have stole my lively hood, broke my back and paid me a pittance in comparison to my worth. When I was broke (both monetarily and physically) the govt they now own didn't give a rats ass about me or anyone like me. Worker's comp is also a scam and full of fraud, but not at the individual's level, no, it's at the mega-corp/govt level but that info is not readily available to the avg joe/jane. That's a whole entire reality in and of itself that I won't waste my time going into.

I will say this on the subject though, google/yahoo/ask "worker comp fraud" sometime and see what initially comes up. See if it isn't specifically about individuals, OR corporations (i.e. insurance corp's, mega-corp's, etc.). One has to dig deep to find the corporate fraud which is actually much much worse than is the individual's fraud, BUT the miniscule individual's fraud is easy to access.

Now back to the reply. Ever hear/read of snake oil salesman? Do I REALLY need to spell it all out? They still exist but now they wear three piece suits and sip three martini lunches while playing 18 holes at some posh course. Are tv commercials full of truth, OR lies/half-truths/misleading info....etc....etc. Ya steal!!

How exactly is one at blue collar level NOT forced to work? Please explain. There's really no choice! The choice is starve or work. When one works it's all about production NOT quality/care for the employee, you know (or likely not) assholes and elbows.