Yes, by all means, let’s talk about income inequality

[Cecilie1200]

...people are working, but the fat cats pay them bupkes, while enjoying huge profits from what essentially is slave labor...

Ah yes, the old 'exploitation of the masses' line. That was then. Now, the fall of the Soviet Union shows that we can either have unequal incomes or no incomes.

Exploitation of the masses = "What do you mean, I have to get a job and EARN my money?!"

 

[Indeependent]

...people are working, but the fat cats pay them bupkes, while enjoying huge profits from what essentially is slave labor...

Ah yes, the old 'exploitation of the masses' line. That was then. Now, the fall of the Soviet Union shows that we can either have unequal incomes or no incomes.

Are you referring to the ever expanding, shiny new Russian Federation?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

...people are working, but the fat cats pay them bupkes, while enjoying huge profits from what essentially is slave labor...

Ah yes, the old 'exploitation of the masses' line. That was then. Now, the fall of the Soviet Union shows that we can either have unequal incomes or no incomes.

Are you referring to the ever expanding, shiny new Russian Federation?

I'll show Russia that Socialism works - Obama's Philosophy

 

[Indeependent]

Ah yes, the old 'exploitation of the masses' line. That was then. Now, the fall of the Soviet Union shows that we can either have unequal incomes or no incomes.

Are you referring to the ever expanding, shiny new Russian Federation?

I'll show Russia that Socialism works - Obama's Philosophy

Straw man. Please explain the weak reference to a reviving USSR.

 

[ClosedCaption]

In the case of the progressives, to achieve an agenda, a problem must be created first, then the only solution is the one offered by progressives is acceptable.

This is what is happening in this country.

I keep hearing this being said by Repubs that only Liberal solutions are acceptable.

When repubs are asked for solutions they either claim there is no problem (like with income inequality) or take a hands off approach like with Climate Change (earth will fix itself) or Free Market (it'll work out, just wait and see)

So, I find it strange that someone who says there isn't a problem or encourages everyone that they don't need a solution because it'll all work out pretends that they are being denied the opportunity to provide an answer.

They literally refuse to give an answer then get offended that someone considers a liberals answer. All you have to do repubs is OFFER A SOLUTION. Its crazy

Absolute nonsense. Expected from you however.

As explained, there is no income inequity problem. There really is no way to prove a negative, so why don't you first provide reasons that income inequality takes money from your pocket, and the government subsistence scraps from your table...

Money concentrated in the hands of a few is:

A: Good
B: Bad

As to the highlighted. Thank you for proving My point. You list two issues, and then go on to say that they are not solutions. Why? Because they don't meet with the 'stated' solutions by the left.

No when I say you have no solutions, I mean you...as in you, have meaning posess. No Solutions otherwise known as answers.

You have no solutions to the problem. If the problem is low wages your "solution" is dont do anything. Thats not a solution thats going about your business and calling it a solution.

BTW...the stated solutions you attribute to the right, as usual, are not based in any reality.

Sure its not based on any reality and you've proved that by running your dick holster and not refuting any thing

 

[Defiant1]

I keep hearing this being said by Repubs that only Liberal solutions are acceptable.

When repubs are asked for solutions they either claim there is no problem (like with income inequality) or take a hands off approach like with Climate Change (earth will fix itself) or Free Market (it'll work out, just wait and see)

So, I find it strange that someone who says there isn't a problem or encourages everyone that they don't need a solution because it'll all work out pretends that they are being denied the opportunity to provide an answer.

They literally refuse to give an answer then get offended that someone considers a liberals answer. All you have to do repubs is OFFER A SOLUTION. Its crazy

Absolute nonsense. Expected from you however.

As explained, there is no income inequity problem. There really is no way to prove a negative, so why don't you first provide reasons that income inequality takes money from your pocket, and the government subsistence scraps from your table...

Money concentrated in the hands of a few is:

A: Good
B: Bad

As to the highlighted. Thank you for proving My point. You list two issues, and then go on to say that they are not solutions. Why? Because they don't meet with the 'stated' solutions by the left.

No when I say you have no solutions, I mean you...as in you, have meaning posess. No Solutions otherwise known as answers.

You have no solutions to the problem. If the problem is low wages your "solution" is dont do anything. Thats not a solution thats going about your business and calling it a solution.

BTW...the stated solutions you attribute to the right, as usual, are not based in any reality.

Sure its not based on any reality and you've proved that by running your dick holster and not refuting any thing

All the money is not concentrated in the hands of a few.

The large amounts of money that is in the hands of the few is neither good nor bad.

You liberals still have not shown that a problem exists because the new person hired to sweep the floors making $8 and the CEO of the company makes $80M.

The new person now has a job and can begin supporting him/herself and has the opportunity to earn the $80M.

 

[ClosedCaption]

Absolute nonsense. Expected from you however.

As explained, there is no income inequity problem. There really is no way to prove a negative, so why don't you first provide reasons that income inequality takes money from your pocket, and the government subsistence scraps from your table...

Money concentrated in the hands of a few is:

A: Good
B: Bad



No when I say you have no solutions, I mean you...as in you, have meaning posess. No Solutions otherwise known as answers.

You have no solutions to the problem. If the problem is low wages your "solution" is dont do anything. Thats not a solution thats going about your business and calling it a solution.

BTW...the stated solutions you attribute to the right, as usual, are not based in any reality.

Sure its not based on any reality and you've proved that by running your dick holster and not refuting any thing

All the money is not concentrated in the hands of a few.

The large amounts of money that is in the hands of the few is neither good nor bad.

You liberals still have not shown that a problem exists because the new person hired to sweep the floors making $8 and the CEO of the company makes $80M.

The new person now has a job and can begin supporting him/herself and has the opportunity to earn the $80M.

I didnt say ALL I said MONEY CONCENTRATED IN THE HANDS OF THE FEW IS:

A) Good
B) Bad

Stop the waffling. I knew you would respond with a non answer (No solutions and all). Direct questions seem to render you helpless where you're unable to use logic or even decide between two things.

MONEY CONCENTRATED IN THE HANDS OF THE FEW IS:

A) Good
B) Bad

 

[Cecilie1200]

...people are working, but the fat cats pay them bupkes, while enjoying huge profits from what essentially is slave labor...

Ah yes, the old 'exploitation of the masses' line. That was then. Now, the fall of the Soviet Union shows that we can either have unequal incomes or no incomes.

Are you referring to the ever expanding, shiny new Russian Federation?

No, honey. It's called "history", and it's sorta important. Have someone explain the concept of two completely different nations existing in the same geographical area at different periods in time. I'd do it, but your stupid depresses me.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Are you referring to the ever expanding, shiny new Russian Federation?

I'll show Russia that Socialism works - Obama's Philosophy

Straw man. Please explain the weak reference to a reviving USSR.

The USSR is not "reviving", merely because a different nation, or federation of nations, is developing in the same place the USSR used to exist. That's like saying the Roman Empire "revived" because Italy exists.

 

[Cecilie1200]

I keep hearing this being said by Repubs that only Liberal solutions are acceptable.

When repubs are asked for solutions they either claim there is no problem (like with income inequality) or take a hands off approach like with Climate Change (earth will fix itself) or Free Market (it'll work out, just wait and see)

So, I find it strange that someone who says there isn't a problem or encourages everyone that they don't need a solution because it'll all work out pretends that they are being denied the opportunity to provide an answer.

They literally refuse to give an answer then get offended that someone considers a liberals answer. All you have to do repubs is OFFER A SOLUTION. Its crazy

Absolute nonsense. Expected from you however.

As explained, there is no income inequity problem. There really is no way to prove a negative, so why don't you first provide reasons that income inequality takes money from your pocket, and the government subsistence scraps from your table...

Money concentrated in the hands of a few is:

A: Good
B: Bad

As to the highlighted. Thank you for proving My point. You list two issues, and then go on to say that they are not solutions. Why? Because they don't meet with the 'stated' solutions by the left.

No when I say you have no solutions, I mean you...as in you, have meaning posess. No Solutions otherwise known as answers.

You have no solutions to the problem. If the problem is low wages your "solution" is dont do anything. Thats not a solution thats going about your business and calling it a solution.

BTW...the stated solutions you attribute to the right, as usual, are not based in any reality.

Sure its not based on any reality and you've proved that by running your dick holster and not refuting any thing

Ahh, the "Little Golden Books Economics Guide". THAT will impress people.

 

[Indeependent]

I'll show Russia that Socialism works - Obama's Philosophy

Straw man. Please explain the weak reference to a reviving USSR.

The USSR is not "reviving", merely because a different nation, or federation of nations, is developing in the same place the USSR used to exist. That's like saying the Roman Empire "revived" because Italy exists.

Ad-hominen...The first sign of no facts.

You are factually quite incorrect as the very same geographical areas, and descendants, of those left out by Corporate America, are now regrouping.
I believe these nations want Democracy and I also believe Putin doesn't care what these nations want.

 

[SteadyMercury]

"Hunger pangs"? Drama much?

Cue orogenicman to roll into the thread with stats on "food insecurity" via his favorite hunger charity websites, and if we're lucky maybe some pictures of a skinny kid in overalls from the dust bowl era to really drive the point home.

 

[Political Junky]

U.S. Inequality in Six Charts : The New Yorker

 

[georgephillip]

That is the problem with people who think that equality can be achieved, especially by using the government and redistribution of wealth.
It is impossible to do.
It is a utopian dream. Key word dream.
There will always be poor and will always be rich no matter what government does or does not do.
The Governments that have the less interference with the country does the best for it's people.
Our founders knew this so they set up our constitution for our Federal Government to have limited powers.

The US Founders, even those who weren't wealthy slaveholders, had a devout fear of direct democracy. Hence, the Electoral College, the original power of the states to appoint senators, the deliberate disenfranchisement of women, Native Americans, African Americans, and even White men without property locked a majority of Americans out of the democratic process at the very beginning of the republic. Our conversation about economic inequality would probably be much different today if the founders hadn't ruled like oligarchs then.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Straw man. Please explain the weak reference to a reviving USSR.

The USSR is not "reviving", merely because a different nation, or federation of nations, is developing in the same place the USSR used to exist. That's like saying the Roman Empire "revived" because Italy exists.

Ad-hominen...The first sign of no facts.

You are factually quite incorrect as the very same geographical areas, and descendants, of those left out by Corporate America, are now regrouping.
I believe these nations want Democracy and I also believe Putin doesn't care what these nations want.

Oh my God. I would facepalm, but this level of stupidity would require such an enormous one, it might knock me unconscious.

Shitforbrains, "ad hominem" is latin for "to the person". An ad hominem attack, therefore, is a personal attack. Nowhere in the post you quoted did I attack a person . . . or, indeed, anything at all. There is no "attack" - much less an ad hominem one - involved in pointing out the simple fact that two nations are not the same nation simply because they have occupied the same territory at different points in time.

Now, you could make the argument that my referring to you as "shitforbrains" in THIS post is an ad hominem attack, but I maintain that the evidence of your posts demonstrates that it is, actually, just another statement of fact.

 

[Cecilie1200]

U.S. Inequality in Six Charts : The New Yorker

Well, finally! Some GOOD news for a change!

 

[Indeependent]

The USSR is not "reviving", merely because a different nation, or federation of nations, is developing in the same place the USSR used to exist. That's like saying the Roman Empire "revived" because Italy exists.

Ad-hominen...The first sign of no facts.

You are factually quite incorrect as the very same geographical areas, and descendants, of those left out by Corporate America, are now regrouping.
I believe these nations want Democracy and I also believe Putin doesn't care what these nations want.

Oh my God. I would facepalm, but this level of stupidity would require such an enormous one, it might knock me unconscious.

Shitforbrains, "ad hominem" is latin for "to the person". An ad hominem attack, therefore, is a personal attack. Nowhere in the post you quoted did I attack a person . . . or, indeed, anything at all. There is no "attack" - much less an ad hominem one - involved in pointing out the simple fact that two nations are not the same nation simply because they have occupied the same territory at different points in time.

Now, you could make the argument that my referring to you as "shitforbrains" in THIS post is an ad hominem attack, but I maintain that the evidence of your posts demonstrates that it is, actually, just another statement of fact.

Post #208.
You are so ideologically stuck that you insult by reflex and don't even realize it.

 

[ClosedCaption]

Ahh, the "Little Golden Books Economics Guide". THAT will impress people.

no no having no point at all is MORE impressive. You've wowed everyone

 

[Cecilie1200]

Ad-hominen...The first sign of no facts.

You are factually quite incorrect as the very same geographical areas, and descendants, of those left out by Corporate America, are now regrouping.
I believe these nations want Democracy and I also believe Putin doesn't care what these nations want.

Oh my God. I would facepalm, but this level of stupidity would require such an enormous one, it might knock me unconscious.

Shitforbrains, "ad hominem" is latin for "to the person". An ad hominem attack, therefore, is a personal attack. Nowhere in the post you quoted did I attack a person . . . or, indeed, anything at all. There is no "attack" - much less an ad hominem one - involved in pointing out the simple fact that two nations are not the same nation simply because they have occupied the same territory at different points in time.

Now, you could make the argument that my referring to you as "shitforbrains" in THIS post is an ad hominem attack, but I maintain that the evidence of your posts demonstrates that it is, actually, just another statement of fact.

Post #208.
You are so ideologically stuck that you insult by reflex and don't even realize it.

No, dimwit, I know perfectly well when I'm insulting someone, and I do it quite deliberately, for well-thought-out and carefully-delineated reasons.

Ask around. Everyone here will tell you that I'm a bad-tempered bitch, and not one person will even PRETEND to think I'm doing it accidentally.

Meanwhile, fool, you've lost BOTH the argument about ad hominem attacks (which you didn't even know how to spell, let alone define) AND the one about the "reviving" of the USSR, which still doesn't exist.

Be glad I didn't charge you tuition for the schooling you just received.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Ahh, the "Little Golden Books Economics Guide". THAT will impress people.

no no having no point at all is MORE impressive. You've wowed everyone

Honey, if you think what I said had no point, you're the only one who does.

. . . Well, except for Indeependent, who appears to be even more obtuse than you are, if that's possible.

If you two hook up, PLEASE promise us you won't reproduce.