Charts from the senate income inequity hearing

[sparky]

It’s a hustle, they trot this out to work folks up because they have nothing to run on, taking advantage of the bad econ. now and willfully ignoring the history, the left is particularly adept at that imho.

.

Please show us the nations that have historically flourished due to a widening disparity then Traj....

~S~

 

[Big Fitz]

It’s a hustle, they trot this out to work folks up because they have nothing to run on, taking advantage of the bad econ. now and willfully ignoring the history, the left is particularly adept at that imho.

.

Please show us the nations that have historically flourished due to a widening disparity then Traj....

~S~

I guess the US doesn't count?

 

[The T]

It’s a hustle, they trot this out to work folks up because they have nothing to run on, taking advantage of the bad econ. now and willfully ignoring the history, the left is particularly adept at that imho.

.

Please show us the nations that have historically flourished due to a widening disparity then Traj....

~S~

I guess the US doesn't count?

Nah...can't be. We are just ripe for being led by the nose like every other failed type of governance...except we haven't failed YET. The O sure would like to make it so though...

 

[Big Fitz]

Just make up your opponents argument, attack, and get high fives from your brethren. All in a days work for a USMB Right Wing Nut.

The "crux" of my argument is not that if taxes are raised on the rich, I will get more income. That's not even what I would argue.

My point is that over the last 30 years the wages of the majority of Americans have not been keeping up with the cost of living while a small few flourishing more so than ever. That's an undeniable fact that y'all wish to ignore and I think that's fucked up a) that it's happening and b) that a lot of people not only don't see anything wrong with it but try to shout it down when it's brought up. I'm not alone but it's all "irrelevant" you guys. Wages are stagnant for most and things have been getting harder and harder for all but a few. Ho hum. You see what's been going on around you and you don't bat an eye at it.

The sad thing is that the grip is so strong and so accepted that there's really not much that can be done about it. The country as a whole has to bend over and take it.

Y'all are an embarrassment.

Boot lickers.

your posting skills are on the decline. You drinking more lately?

 

[georgephillip]

Do you sheep really think that the government taking money away from those who make more than you will increase your income?

Has the government pilfered any of your money and given it to Mitt?

How is that an answer to my question?

Since only government has the power to coin money and lay taxes, all governments have the obligation to take money from one group and give it to another. Why do you suppose it's almost always the richest 1% who benefit from governmental gifts?

 

[sparky]

Please show us the nations that have historically flourished due to a widening disparity then Traj....

~S~

I guess the US doesn't count?

Nah...can't be. We are just ripe for being led by the nose like every other failed type of governance...except we haven't failed YET. The O sure would like to make it so though...

we are creating billionaires and poverty simutaliously here

that's not healthy

and i say we aren't immune

AGAIN I WILL ASK, despite the non sequitors

Please show us the nations that have historically flourished due to a widening disparity
~S~

 

[Meister]

Why is the right refusing to back up their claims once again?


Prove income inequality has NO effect on revolutions?

I just did, I posted a chart showing the point iin your OP is just warmed over poppeycock. the variance over 90 years has been remarkably close.

I doubt that TM will respond to the chart, it just doesn't fit her delusion.

 

[The T]

I guess the US doesn't count?

Nah...can't be. We are just ripe for being led by the nose like every other failed type of governance...except we haven't failed YET. The O sure would like to make it so though...

we are creating billionaires and poverty simutaliously here

that's not healthy

and i say we aren't immune

AGAIN I WILL ASK, despite the non sequitors

Please show us the nations that have historically flourished due to a widening disparity
~S~

And why is it unhealthy? Try undue Gubmint interference into economic Liberty of the individual...

Get it?

 

[Liability]

Just make up your opponents argument, attack, and get high fives from your brethren. All in a days work for a USMB Right Wing Nut.

The "crux" of my argument is not that if taxes are raised on the rich, I will get more income. That's not even what I would argue.

My point is that over the last 30 years the wages of the majority of Americans have not been keeping up with the cost of living while a small few flourishing more so than ever. That's an undeniable fact that y'all wish to ignore and I think that's fucked up a) that it's happening and b) that a lot of people not only don't see anything wrong with it but try to shout it down when it's brought up. I'm not alone but it's all "irrelevant" you guys. Wages are stagnant for most and things have been getting harder and harder for all but a few. Ho hum. You see what's been going on around you and you don't bat an eye at it.

The sad thing is that the grip is so strong and so accepted that there's really not much that can be done about it. The country as a whole has to bend over and take it.

Y'all are an embarrassment.

Boot lickers.

Oh. So the ISSUE is the fact that the cost of living has been going up faster than wages -- and I suppose this also takes into account inflation.

And income inequality addresses that concern HOW, exactly?

I ask, because it seems evident that the real issue is not "income inequality." It SEEMS to be that the REAL issue is addressing the factors that make the cost of living fly so high so fast.

What factors attribute to that?

Shouldn't those be the matters addressed?

Or, are you actually contending that the main (or one of the main) factors is "income inequality?"

Your "boot lickers" rhetoric is stale and trite, by the way. Quite unpersuasive of you.

 

[sparky]

Nah...can't be. We are just ripe for being led by the nose like every other failed type of governance...except we haven't failed YET. The O sure would like to make it so though...

we are creating billionaires and poverty simutaliously here

that's not healthy

and i say we aren't immune

AGAIN I WILL ASK, despite the non sequitors

Please show us the nations that have historically flourished due to a widening disparity
~S~

And why is it unhealthy? Try undue Gubmint interference into economic Liberty of the individual...

Get it?

I did not mention liberties, freedoms, or governance T

the Q still stands

~S~

 

[Liability]

England flourished. Big income disparity in feudal times.

The Roman EMPIRE itself flourished. HUGE income disparity between the Patricians and the -- let's go out on a limb here and say -- the SLAVES.

Indeed, I bet it would be many time more difficult to cite an historical example of a society (country or empire) that didn't get going on the backs of a pretty big income disparity.

 

[mudwhistle]

Why is the right refusing to back up their claims once again?


Prove income inequality has NO effect on revolutions?

I just did, I posted a chart showing the point iin your OP is just warmed over poppeycock. the variance over 90 years has been remarkably close.

The OP and the charts in the link relate to the growing income inequality, not wealth.

You may all now continue with your daily circle jerk.

Income, wealth, not much difference.

Sometimes it's not how much you make but how well you invested what you made.

The have-nots tend to just spend while the haves tend to invest and allow their income to grow.

So folks like TM think the smart investor deserves the shaft for using his brain.

 

[Big Fitz]

I guess the US doesn't count?

Nah...can't be. We are just ripe for being led by the nose like every other failed type of governance...except we haven't failed YET. The O sure would like to make it so though...

we are creating billionaires and poverty simutaliously here

that's not healthy

and i say we aren't immune

AGAIN I WILL ASK, despite the non sequitors

Please show us the nations that have historically flourished due to a widening disparity
~S~

we are creating billionaires and poverty simutaliously here

As does every economic system with our level of activity. you gonna ***** about this happening for the Chinese, Japanese, Indians and Vietnamese too?

that's not healthy

Incredibly assumptive, based on an esoteric set of criterion with no real basis in fact but rather is an emotional appeal based on the concept of 'fairness' which needs to be defined before it can be discussed.

and i say we aren't immune

Of course not. No economy is. You have no point or cause for alarm.

AGAIN I WILL ASK, despite the non sequitors

You deny the fact that the very history of economic growth and prosperity in the US does not refute your very supposition? If so, what is your reasoning for discounting a rather obvious example that you live in?

Please show us the nations that have historically flourished due to a widening disparity

How's India doing these days? Some people are getting AWFULLY rich over there, while hundreds of millions stay poor. Would you say it safe to say that the nation is really prospering in many ways, but since capitalism is a meritocratic system based on work, production, skill and innovation as a service to the market, not everyone's profiting in it because they do little to advance their nation forward? Just because prosperity does not fall equally on all people, but rather by a combination of methods that often mirror the progression and growth of skilled labor, opportunity and innovation, does not mean that it's wrong on it's face.

Your premise is flawed at the foundational theory that income inequality is bad for a society and has a causative relationship to suffering and hardship of its citizens.

 

[sparky]

England flourished. Big income disparity in feudal times.

The Roman EMPIRE itself flourished. HUGE income disparity between the Patricians and the -- let's go out on a limb here and say -- the SLAVES.

Indeed, I bet it would be many time more difficult to cite an historical example of a society (country or empire) that didn't get going on the backs of a pretty big income disparity.

it could well be argued both examples were their demise Liability.....~S~

 

[Liability]

England flourished. Big income disparity in feudal times.

The Roman EMPIRE itself flourished. HUGE income disparity between the Patricians and the -- let's go out on a limb here and say -- the SLAVES.

Indeed, I bet it would be many time more difficult to cite an historical example of a society (country or empire) that didn't get going on the backs of a pretty big income disparity.

it could well be argued both examples were their demise Liability.....~S~

England is not dead.

And Rome had TONS of problems. Was income disparity one of them? Yeah. Maybe. But that's not evidence that it was a significant problem or a contributing one to the collapse of that Empire.

 

[The T]

England flourished. Big income disparity in feudal times.

The Roman EMPIRE itself flourished. HUGE income disparity between the Patricians and the -- let's go out on a limb here and say -- the SLAVES.

Indeed, I bet it would be many time more difficult to cite an historical example of a society (country or empire) that didn't get going on the backs of a pretty big income disparity.

Which swerves into my earlier post where I stated that the present Government means to exact the same upon us by placing us on that same path except the slavery part is generational.

 

[sparky]

Your premise is flawed at the foundational theory that income inequality is bad for a society and has a causative relationship to suffering and hardship of its citizens.

your assumption has no validity if your example falls prey to it

~S~

 

[Big Fitz]

Your premise is flawed at the foundational theory that income inequality is bad for a society and has a causative relationship to suffering and hardship of its citizens.

your assumption has no validity if your example falls prey to it

~S~

I do believe you've discovered the problem with your argument. Your assumption has no validity.

Doctor, heal thyself.

 

[sparky]

England flourished. Big income disparity in feudal times.

The Roman EMPIRE itself flourished. HUGE income disparity between the Patricians and the -- let's go out on a limb here and say -- the SLAVES.

Indeed, I bet it would be many time more difficult to cite an historical example of a society (country or empire) that didn't get going on the backs of a pretty big income disparity.

it could well be argued both examples were their demise Liability.....~S~

England is not dead.

And Rome had TONS of problems. Was income disparity one of them? Yeah. Maybe. But that's not evidence that it was a significant problem or a contributing one to the collapse of that Empire.

England is presently a socialist quagmire

the pendelum swung a tad to far imho....

There are lots of factors that could be argued for/against any given country's upswing or downturn

disparity , imho, only helped the few, on the backs of the many



~S~

 

[Trajan]

Just make up your opponents argument, attack, and get high fives from your brethren. All in a days work for a USMB Right Wing Nut.

The "crux" of my argument is not that if taxes are raised on the rich, I will get more income. That's not even what I would argue.

My point is that over the last 30 years the wages of the majority of Americans have not been keeping up with the cost of living while a small few flourishing more so than ever. That's an undeniable fact that y'all wish to ignore and I think that's fucked up a) that it's happening and b) that a lot of people not only don't see anything wrong with it but try to shout it down when it's brought up. I'm not alone but it's all "irrelevant" you guys. Wages are stagnant for most and things have been getting harder and harder for all but a few. Ho hum. You see what's been going on around you and you don't bat an eye at it.

The sad thing is that the grip is so strong and so accepted that there's really not much that can be done about it. The country as a whole has to bend over and take it.

Y'all are an embarrassment.

Boot lickers.

it appears to me that you are choosing to set the boundaries of the debate into a narrow narrow confine, then declaring the rest of us nuts....*shrugs*Oh and that "few"? is not a few, no where near it...