The New Inequality Is Wealth, Not Income

[there4eyeM]

LOL

No nation of EARTH relies more on their wealthy to pay for things than the good ol' USA.


Our poor and working class consume the wealth in America at an alarmingly increasing rate, even though they continue to contribute less and less.

Taking the advice from the cited proverb, I will not argue with you.

You are unarmed.


LOL

You are unashamed.

 

[SniperFire]

Taking the advice from the cited proverb, I will not argue with you.

You are unarmed.


LOL

You are unashamed.

Do you take issue with the facts I present, or are you just another whiny little hopey changey type?

 

[ba1614]

Reid Cramer: The New Inequality Is Wealth, Not Income

Here is what the Fed reported about the changes in wealth holdings. Between 2007 and 2010, the average family saw their wealth decline 39 percent. During the same period, median incomes dipped 8%. The 39% drop in wealth speaks to the severity of the recession but the impact was not experienced equally. Families in the top ten percent by income actually saw their net worth increase almost two percent.

Those at the top had their wealth holdings increase and almost everybody else experienced a drastic decline. That's inequality by definition. Check out the visual (rollover to see the absolute figures).

http://www.federalreserve.gov/pubs/bulletin/2012/PDF/scf12.pdf


GOP lemmings ignore the obvious to wipe the asses of the rich.

I didn't read the thread but sure hope someone pointed out that the top 10% in "wealth holdings" aren't going to be the same people as those "..in the top ten percent by income".

Of course those "in the top ten percent by income" are going to see their wealth increase! Point me to a time in history when it hasn't.

 

[Richard-H]

The problem with wealth distribution is that those people who create the wealth (i.e. the employees), are not being paid in proportion to their productive value. They are being ripped off.

The people who are receiving the lions share of the wealth, make little or no contribution to the creation of wealth. They are stealing money from the workers, simply because they are economically empowered to do so.

We live in a society where everyone grabs the most they can - there is no relationship between productivity and wealth.

The only solution so far has been to have the government act like Robin Hood by taxing the wealthy and redistributing the wealth to various segments of society - many of whom don't deserve it either.

The best solution would be to insure that people are paid fairly - on par with their productive value. This would allow for some profits for capital investment, but the lion's share of the wealth would go to the workers. Unfortunately, there is no easy way of measuring everyone's true productive value.

 

[LeftofLeft]

A lot of people sure seem to eat up the Socialist propaganda (income inequality), that's why this country is going to hell and we have someone like Obama elected as President

shame

In Socialism, there is significant Wealth Inequality. The Elite enjoy a shield of protection from the masses as the masses are content to be complacent. The ruling elite make the masses feel better about themselves as the number of "wealthy" have been reduced.

Why in God's name would any country want to move in this direction? Capitalism creates fair and equal opportunity for anyone to create wealth for themselves more than any other socioeconomic infrastructure.

Howard Dean stares that the US needs to be part Capitalism, part socialism. In slicing up that pie, at least two thirds needs to be capitalism while socialism is limited.

 

[zeke]

Payments on a mortgage do not increase one's equity if the real estate market is falling.

Flat taxes are a very effective way for the poor to pay even more for the upper income levels.

One does not need to be a communist or even left to see that powerful people maintain their power any way they can and at any cost to as many others as necessary. Defending such people is indefensible.

Any reduction in liabilities as compared to assets is an increase in net worth.

Even if you are upside down on a loan, if you make a payment your net worth increases

LMAO
I have a house worth 100,000. My mortgage balance if 120,000. I have a neg. net worth of
20,000. I make a payment and reduct my loan balance by, lets say, 200. dollars.

Now I have a neg net worth of 19,800.

You want to try and show how I have INCREASED my net worth on a house that I owe more that it's worth.


And lets no parse words. Increase means just that; a gain.

Negative means just that; a loss.

Surely you are not going to say that a reduction in balance owed from 120000 to 119800 is a gain in net worth. When the home is only worth 100k.

Or do you not understand what "net worth" represents? Net worth is the asets minus your liabilities on those assets.

If you owe more that it is worth, you don't have "net worth" in that particular asset.

But you knew that. Didn't you. And just got all hung up on partisan politics.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Payments on a mortgage do not increase one's equity if the real estate market is falling.

Flat taxes are a very effective way for the poor to pay even more for the upper income levels.

One does not need to be a communist or even left to see that powerful people maintain their power any way they can and at any cost to as many others as necessary. Defending such people is indefensible.

Any reduction in liabilities as compared to assets is an increase in net worth.

Even if you are upside down on a loan, if you make a payment your net worth increases

LMAO
I have a house worth 100,000. My mortgage balance if 120,000. I have a neg. net worth of
20,000. I make a payment and reduct my loan balance by, lets say, 200. dollars.

Now I have a neg net worth of 19,800.

You want to try and show how I have INCREASED my net worth on a house that I owe more that it's worth.


And lets no parse words. Increase means just that; a gain.

Negative means just that; a loss.

Surely you are not going to say that a reduction in balance owed from 120000 to 119800 is a gain in net worth. When the home is only worth 100k.

Or do you not understand what "net worth" represents? Net worth is the asets minus your liabilities on those assets.

If you owe more that it is worth, you don't have "net worth" in that particular asset.

But you knew that. Didn't you. And just got all hung up on partisan politics.

Excuse me but -190000 is greater than -200000

So your net worth while still negative has increased.

It's called basic math.

And the term net worth applies to all assets and liabilities not just one.

 

[Skull Pilot]

The problem with wealth distribution is that those people who create the wealth (i.e. the employees), are not being paid in proportion to their productive value. They are being ripped off.

No one is ripping off anyone. If you don't think you're making enough then you are free to find another job and/or start your own business.

 

[ba1614]

The problem with wealth distribution is that those people who create the wealth (i.e. the employees), are not being paid in proportion to their productive value. They are being ripped off.

The people who are receiving the lions share of the wealth, make little or no contribution to the creation of wealth. They are stealing money from the workers, simply because they are economically empowered to do so.

We live in a society where everyone grabs the most they can - there is no relationship between productivity and wealth.

The only solution so far has been to have the government act like Robin Hood by taxing the wealthy and redistributing the wealth to various segments of society - many of whom don't deserve it either.

The best solution would be to insure that people are paid fairly - on par with their productive value. This would allow for some profits for capital investment, but the lion's share of the wealth would go to the workers. Unfortunately, there is no easy way of measuring everyone's true productive value.

Share in the profits just not the risk, that's how it should be right?

 

[zeke]

Any reduction in liabilities as compared to assets is an increase in net worth.

Even if you are upside down on a loan, if you make a payment your net worth increases

LMAO
I have a house worth 100,000. My mortgage balance if 120,000. I have a neg. net worth of
20,000. I make a payment and reduct my loan balance by, lets say, 200. dollars.

Now I have a neg net worth of 19,800.

You want to try and show how I have INCREASED my net worth on a house that I owe more that it's worth.


And lets no parse words. Increase means just that; a gain.

Negative means just that; a loss.

Surely you are not going to say that a reduction in balance owed from 120000 to 119800 is a gain in net worth. When the home is only worth 100k.

Or do you not understand what "net worth" represents? Net worth is the asets minus your liabilities on those assets.

If you owe more that it is worth, you don't have "net worth" in that particular asset.

But you knew that. Didn't you. And just got all hung up on partisan politics.

Excuse me but -190000 is greater than -200000

So your net worth while still negative has increased.

It's called basic math.

And the term net worth applies to all assets and liabilities not just one.

Now I have to say what I started to say in my first post.

YOU my man are fuking stupid.

But I tell you what. YOU go to a banker and tell him you want to borrow money and use your negative net worth in your home for security. See what a banker thinks of your version of "net worth"

I mean fuking really. You think because you decreased the balance owed on a home that you owe more than the value of and you think you have increased your net worth.

You are to stupid or partisan to speak with.

 

[kaz]

The primary reason they want to get rid of the estate tax is to ensure the wealth gap remains.

Uh oh, you nailed us. I don't want to leave the money I earned to my children, not redistributed to everyone else, because I want to maintain a "wealth gap." Damn, I hate when you get us like that...

 

[kaz]

GOP lemmings ignore the obvious to wipe the asses of the rich.

Sure Flaylo, opposing your class warfare and thinking everyone in this country should be treated the same by government is wiping "the asses of the rich." You and Poo Poo are idiots. But then, what's new?

 

[emptystep]

A lot of people sure seem to eat up the Socialist propaganda (income inequality), that's why this country is going to hell and we have someone like Obama elected as President

shame

In Socialism, there is significant Wealth Inequality. The Elite enjoy a shield of protection from the masses as the masses are content to be complacent. The ruling elite make the masses feel better about themselves as the number of "wealthy" have been reduced.

Why in God's name would any country want to move in this direction? Capitalism creates fair and equal opportunity for anyone to create wealth for themselves more than any other socioeconomic infrastructure.

Howard Dean stares that the US needs to be part Capitalism, part socialism. In slicing up that pie, at least two thirds needs to be capitalism while socialism is limited.

You just described the ideal republican society.

 

[Seawytch]

Who mentioned anything about the poor? Nice strawman.

This is about opportunity. People are working hard, but can't make it....they need government subsidies to keep a roof over their heads and food on the table....yet you think that they can miraculously find enough SOMEWHERE to start their own business and become wealthy.

While the currently wealthy are hoarding their holdings and/or investing away from the country....further limiting opportunity.

Our country is falling behind....not because of Obama....not because of entitlements or debt....I mean they play a part...but mostly it's about greed and a huge lack of patriotism in our private sector.

Who said that? Strawman, much, Stoolfan?

LOL

Bullshit....do you have any idea how many times you assholes have said..."You don't like your wages? Start your own business and get rich!"

That's not a strawman and is very relevant to the topic. And once again? Stoolfan? Can't win? ATTACK!

You know you're dead wrong...Just too married to your fucked up party to admit it.

It happened in the thread...shorty after you said this.

No one is ripping off anyone. If you don't think you're making enough then you are free to find another job and/or start your own business.

See.

Of course we're being ripped off.

 

[zeke]

GOP lemmings ignore the obvious to wipe the asses of the rich.

Sure Flaylo, opposing your class warfare and thinking everyone in this country should be treated the same by government is wiping "the asses of the rich." You and Poo Poo are idiots. But then, what's new?

So you think you are the "equal" of any muti billioniare?

You got your own lobbyists for your projects/business interests?

You got Senators and Congresspeople on your speed dial, that take your calls no matter what?

You got a accounting firm to handle all your billions in income?

A tax lawyer on staff for those pesky IRS questions?

5 multi million dollar houses?

Several off shore bank/investment accounts?

House staff, private chef,

I could go on however.

About the only thing "equal" between you and a multi billioniare is that............. you both spell "equal" the same way.

 

[SniperFire]

GOP lemmings ignore the obvious to wipe the asses of the rich.

Sure Flaylo, opposing your class warfare and thinking everyone in this country should be treated the same by government is wiping "the asses of the rich." You and Poo Poo are idiots. But then, what's new?

So you think you are the "equal" of any muti billioniare?

You got your own lobbyists for your projects/business interests?

You got Senators and Congresspeople on your speed dial, that take your calls no matter what?

You got a accounting firm to handle all your billions in income?

A tax lawyer on staff for those pesky IRS questions?

5 multi million dollar houses?

Several off shore bank/investment accounts?

House staff, private chef,

I could go on however.

About the only thing "equal" between you and a multi billioniare is that............. you both spell "equal" the same way.

Zeke's mommy told him everybody should have equal stuff.

ROTF

 

[AmyNation]

Ohhh goodie, another

"rich people are mean!"
"poor people are greedy"

thread!

 

[Inthemiddle]

You missed the the part where the OP denegrated others for 'wiping the asses of the rich?'

Your hatred blinds you.


LOL

1. No, I did not miss it.

2. I have no hatred.

3. Your response does not answer my question.

 

[Inthemiddle]

People who live paycheck to paycheck without savings weren't hit at all.

Except, ya know, little things like wage deflation, price inflation, long term unemployment, savings depletion, etc.

 

[zeke]

and snippers mommy? told him that if he would suck the dicks of real rich people, they would consider him their "equal".

How's that working out for you snipper. You their equal yet? Or you still got a few more dicks to suck?