Charts from the senate income inequity hearing

[Liability]

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~

The relevant term in your foregoing "argument" is the phrase "imho."

 

[Big Fitz]

England is presently a socialist quagmire

By Jove! He's hit that one on the head! The question is, what to DO about such a realization?

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

A tad? They damn near went over the top and down the other side.

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

yes yes... stay on target. You identified Britain's problem: Socialism. Don't go wobbly now.

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

D'OHHHH!!!!! There we go! Right back into socialist dogma. Dammit! So close! SO close! I had hopes for you yet.

 

[Skull Pilot]

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.

And the remedy is to raise taxes on those making the most according to people here.

All I asked was how will raising taxes address income disparity and you said that question was "retarded".

And BTW if you don't think taxes will address said income disparity that what exactly will?

Perhaps telling people they can only make a predetermined maximum income?

 

[Skull Pilot]

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?

Tell where is that government "obligation" spelled put in our constitution?

And I think a lot of people who receive a larger refund than the taxes they actually pay are getting a pretty good "gift".

I don't know any rich people who receive a refund larger than their tax obligations do you?

 

[editec]

I'm not sure that wealth disparity, in and of itself, is necessarily THE problem.

THE problem tdoay, as I see it, is the wealth disparity increase even as the standard of living of those who are not wealthy is on the decline.

That does not make for a happy society.

AFter all, if a society doesn't take care of its own, its own aren't going to take care of society, either.

 

[Article 15]

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.

And the remedy is to raise taxes on those making the most according to people here.

All I asked was how will raising taxes address income disparity and you said that question was "retarded".

And BTW if you don't think taxes will address said income disparity that what exactly will?

Perhaps telling people they can only make a predetermined maximum income?

Setting a maximum limit on earnings will never happen and I don't think it should be done. Legislation that ties CEO and top exec pay to their lowest paid employee wont happen either, however I do think that work wonders in aligning the slopes of those line. As I said....the grip is so strong, the elite and big money interest have so much control that anything that could do something about that massive skew is DOA. We're effed.

Now, look at these graphs:

Do you see this as a problem for our country?

If you do, what do YOU suggest be done about it?

If you don't......then **** you this conversation is over.

 

[Article 15]

I'm not sure that wealth disparity, in and of itself, is necessarily THE problem.

THE problem tdoay, as I see it, is the wealth disparity increase even as the standard of living of those who are not wealthy is on the decline.

That does not make for a happy society.

AFter all, if a society doesn't take care of its own, its own aren't going to take care of society, either.

Yup

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Do you still doubt me when I say that American Democrats are to the left of real communists like the Vietnamese and ChiComs and Russians who have embraced free markets and capitalism the prosperity that flows from them?

 

[LoneLaugher]

Simplistic scenerio:

I am an American small business owner.

It is a month before I close my books for the fiscal year. I have had a good year and have the choice of reporting $3,000,000 in income or reinvesting part of it into my business.

My income tax rate is 35% on income up to the first million and 60% on income over the first million.

What will I be likely to do.

My income tax rate is 35% on the entirety of my income..........will I do the same thing?

My income tax rate is 20% on the entirety of my income..........how about now?

Low income taxes on high incomes may very well be a disincentive to investment.

 

[Skull Pilot]

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.

And the remedy is to raise taxes on those making the most according to people here.

All I asked was how will raising taxes address income disparity and you said that question was "retarded".

And BTW if you don't think taxes will address said income disparity that what exactly will?

Perhaps telling people they can only make a predetermined maximum income?

Setting a maximum limit on earnings will never happen and I don't think it should be done. Legislation that ties CEO and top exec pay to their lowest paid employee wont happen either, however I do think that work wonders in aligning the slopes of those line. As I said....the grip is so strong, the elite and big money interest have so much control that anything that could do something about that massive skew is DOA. We're effed.

Now, look at these graphs:

Do you see this as a problem for our country?

If you do, what do YOU suggest be done about it?

If you don't......then **** you this conversation is over.

I don't see a problem.

Our income has more than tripled in the last 5 years.

Now to you that's a problem, to me it's not.

My increase in income has not negatively affected anyone so I don't see the increase in or the amount of another's income as a problem to me or anyone else.

The corruption in government is the big problem here. Politicians make laws that legally allow others to bribe them.

As I said before we need to cut off the serpent's head not its tail.

 

[Listening]

How funny is it that our senate (a bunch of millionaires) is worried about income inequality.

Since when is that their function ?

Answer: Never has been......



What is even more funny is that you morons on the left think that they will actually do something about it.

IF they go tax the rich, it will be for the purposes of lining the pockets of lobbyists and companies that pay the lobbiests...not for the poor.

You just don''t get it.

 

[editec]

Do you still doubt me when I say that American Democrats are to the left of real communists like the Vietnamese and ChiComs and Russians who have embraced free markets and capitalism the prosperity that flows from them?

Yes, I do.

 

[editec]

Simplistic scenerio:

I am an American small business owner.

It is a month before I close my books for the fiscal year. I have had a good year and have the choice of reporting $3,000,000 in income or reinvesting part of it into my business.

My income tax rate is 35% on income up to the first million and 60% on income over the first million.

What will I be likely to do.

My income tax rate is 35% on the entirety of my income..........will I do the same thing?

My income tax rate is 20% on the entirety of my income..........how about now?

Low income taxes on high incomes may very well be a disincentive to investment.

Spot on.

 

[editec]

How funny is it that our senate (a bunch of millionaires) is worried about income inequality.

Since when is that their function ?

Answer: Never has been......



What is even more funny is that you morons on the left think that they will actually do something about it.

IF they go tax the rich, it will be for the purposes of lining the pockets of lobbyists and companies that pay the lobbiests...not for the poor.

You just don''t get it.

You are basically right about the above except for this

What is even more funny is that you morons on the left think that they will actually do something about it.

.

FYI, the LEFT has gotten it for decades. That's why they are not DEMOCRATS.

 

[Article 15]

I don't see a problem.

Our income has more than tripled in the last 5 years.

In that case, **** you.

 

[Truthmatters]

how did a thread I started yesterday get relabeled as a sparky thread?

 

[Truthmatters]

Mind-Blowing Charts From the Senate's Income Inequality Hearing | Mother Jones



The 1 percent hasn't controlled such a large share of the economy since the eve of the Great Depression:

But as the rich have earned a larger share, they've paid a smaller and smaller share in taxes

I glad he posted the actual charts but by whom and why was thread altered?

 

[Article 15]

how did a thread I started yesterday get relabeled as a sparky thread?

Since you somehow missed the "merged" post, you both started threads about the same charts from the same hearing and the threads got merged. Since Sparky made the first thread chronologically, the thread is labeled as being started by him.

 

[Truthmatters]

thank you

 

[Skull Pilot]

How funny is it that our senate (a bunch of millionaires) is worried about income inequality.

Since when is that their function ?

Answer: Never has been......



What is even more funny is that you morons on the left think that they will actually do something about it.

IF they go tax the rich, it will be for the purposes of lining the pockets of lobbyists and companies that pay the lobbiests...not for the poor.

You just don''t get it.

The question no one is asking is how can a person who was of moderate means before being elected and earns only 160K a year while serving becomes a multi millionaire in just a few short years?

People here want to blame it on "the rich" or "big business" bribing politicians but I blame the politicians who pass laws to enrich themselves.