Fixing Inequality

[ClosedCaption]

You no savvy Econ 101, eh?

State your meaning bro

If you think we need to lower wages to compete with China you don't know diddly about economics. Actually even if you dont think that you dont know diddly. You prove it every time you post on the topic.

I understand you have taken Zingers 101 but explain how we can make cheaper products without lowering wages.

When you come back with another set up 80's insults I'll know you have nothing

 

[Bombur]

It would be a problem IF we had true poverty like there is in India. We don't. Our poor are inordinately comfortable. They don't go without. They don't suffer the misery of poverty but the misery of envy.

It leads to more dependence on government which is inefficient. It leads to more people out of work or underemployed which is inefficient. It leads to problems with communities that implode in on themselves as jobs go away. It leads to more people in prison. It leads to problems with our education system. I can go on but I hope you get the point.

For ones like you wish to allow dependence on government.. instead of eliminating programs that lead to that very dependence, rather than having people keep to their own responsibilities and be forced to work them out all on their own.. this is not a job for the federal government, in any way, shape, or form

Government programs are inefficient. Unemployed and underemployed people are also inefficient. Large decreases in demand are also inefficient. Economic volatility is also inefficient. Communities that implode are inefficient. People in prison are inefficient. Parents that are poor have a harder time providing the care needed by their children is also inefficient.

Economics is not an easy topic to study because everything is connected and everything has pros and cons. There is also the simple fact that people have moral agendas. You may not like them but we do not live in a nation of individual sociopaths. We live in a nation where people will literally die for one another so that the nation can survive and thrive.

 

[Bombur]

For ones like you wish to allow dependence on government.. instead of eliminating programs that lead to that very dependence, rather than having people keep to their own responsibilities and be forced to work them out all on their own.. this is not a job for the federal government, in any way, shape, or form

You do realize all this extreme inequality just leads to bigger government right?

No.. ones like you that think that government's job is to try and fix inequality in outcome help to bring about bigger government... government cannot create equalized outcome without more and more limitations on freedom and more and more power... this has been tried and has (and will) failed every time

The goal is not equalized outcome.

HTH

 

[Ame®icano]

Actually, exportation of jobs is a direct result of capitalism==> labor is treated as a mere commodity, and is priced accordingly. The cheapest stock is purchased when no regulation exists that prevents it. This isn't rocket science.

The best thing the government can do is abandon it's pro-corporate "low inflation" philosophy and adopt a pro-worker "full employment" philosophy. That should be apparent to everyone, but for some reason it isn't.

What should labor be treated as? Isn't capital treated as a "mere commodity" as well, and priced transparently to boot?
The Soviet Union had a full employment policy. Doubtless you'd like to go back to that.

Labor is EVERYTHING. Everything you see around you is created by labor--every road, every pencil, every magazine, every CD, EVERYTHING. All wealth is created by--and ONLY BY--the labor of productive workers. It would seem fundamental, then, that labor should decide how the resultant profit is distributed.

And eventually, that will be how things evolve economically; remember, feudalism used to be the prevailing economic practice.

ALSO, the former USSR was a military dictatorship that talked of socialism but practiced totalitarianism. That is indisputable.

When labor risk their money to start or own the company, let them decide whatever they want. Until then, they will just have to agree to exchange their labor for the money thru employment.

 

[Brain357]

Wrong, bigger government is the cause of income inequality, not the result of it.

why do you libs always have everything backwards?

That's funny. We have obamacare because the rich no longer give good benefits. So government makes a program. Corporate welfare.

We have so many people on welfare because the rich wanted more profits and shipped jobs overseas.

Social security and Medicare are huge because companies keep more profits and no longer give pensions and healthcare into retirement. More corporate welfare.

I could go on and on. More inequality equals more big government. Wake up.

So you must force people to give what you want.. got it

Well you seem to have no counter so it's clear more inequality increases the size of government. It certainly has here.

 

[The Rabbi]

Actually it is not really a hope in a utopia but a fear of dystopia that would result from 4 more decades of unchecked growth in income inequality.

Although you probably don't even know what the income inequality problem is.

Actually neither do you.

If you say so chief.

You can prove me wrong any time now, sweetheart.

 

[The Rabbi]

State your meaning bro

If you think we need to lower wages to compete with China you don't know diddly about economics. Actually even if you dont think that you dont know diddly. You prove it every time you post on the topic.

I understand you have taken Zingers 101 but explain how we can make cheaper products without lowering wages.

When you come back with another set up 80's insults I'll know you have nothing

Do you understand what "unit labor cost" means? I know you'll have to Google it before responding.
How about "comparative advantage"?
Yeah I know there I go again throwing around those terms that sound like gobbledy gook to you. It's unfair.

 

[The Rabbi]

That's funny. We have obamacare because the rich no longer give good benefits. So government makes a program. Corporate welfare.

We have so many people on welfare because the rich wanted more profits and shipped jobs overseas.

Social security and Medicare are huge because companies keep more profits and no longer give pensions and healthcare into retirement. More corporate welfare.

I could go on and on. More inequality equals more big government. Wake up.

So you must force people to give what you want.. got it

Well you seem to have no counter so it's clear more inequality increases the size of government. It certainly has here.

Is the government in Cuba larger or smaller than prior to 1962? Is there more or less inequality there now?
Yeah, run along junior. The big boys are talking here.

 

[Brain357]

Inequality can't be fixed except by an incredible amount of tyranny. Freedom and equality are mutually exclusive terms.

Income inequality doesn't need fixing. Those who are pushing for it looks on Lenin or Mao as their idols, chanting "forward" and waving hammer and sickle flags. Didn't we learn how that ended?

I guess your ok with all the corporate welfare helping increase inequality?

Have you looked at all the countries with high inequality? They aren't exactly on the top of the happiest places to live rankings. Why do you want us going in that direction?

 

[Brain357]

So you must force people to give what you want.. got it

Well you seem to have no counter so it's clear more inequality increases the size of government. It certainly has here.

Is the government in Cuba larger or smaller than prior to 1962? Is there more or less inequality there now?
Yeah, run along junior. The big boys are talking here.

Is the US government bigger now than it was in 1980? Has inequality increased? Sorry junior.

 

[Ame®icano]

State your meaning bro

If you think we need to lower wages to compete with China you don't know diddly about economics. Actually even if you dont think that you dont know diddly. You prove it every time you post on the topic.

I understand you have taken Zingers 101 but explain how we can make cheaper products without lowering wages.

When you come back with another set up 80's insults I'll know you have nothing

Why not simply lower taxes on businesses?

 

[Bombur]

Actually neither do you.

If you say so chief.

You can prove me wrong any time now, sweetheart.

I provided more proof than you did, Buttercup.

 

[Ame®icano]

Inequality can't be fixed except by an incredible amount of tyranny. Freedom and equality are mutually exclusive terms.

Income inequality doesn't need fixing. Those who are pushing for it looks on Lenin or Mao as their idols, chanting "forward" and waving hammer and sickle flags. Didn't we learn how that ended?

I guess your ok with all the corporate welfare helping increase inequality?

Have you looked at all the countries with high inequality? They aren't exactly on the top of the happiest places to live rankings. Why do you want us going in that direction?

Try answering the question: Where corporate welfare came from?

And who exactly create that happiness index?

 

[Brain357]

If you think we need to lower wages to compete with China you don't know diddly about economics. Actually even if you dont think that you dont know diddly. You prove it every time you post on the topic.

I understand you have taken Zingers 101 but explain how we can make cheaper products without lowering wages.

When you come back with another set up 80's insults I'll know you have nothing

Why not simply lower taxes on businesses?

Well they would just funnel it to the executives.

I'd give lower taxes to companies who provide good wages, retirement, and benefits. Heck any business doing that could pay no taxes. Would be better than all the corporate welfare.

 

[Bombur]

How about we just create a VAT to replace the corp tax and provide some minimal incentives for domestic labor.

The biggest problem with our corp tax is how it relates to foreign trade.

 

[Ame®icano]

I understand you have taken Zingers 101 but explain how we can make cheaper products without lowering wages.

When you come back with another set up 80's insults I'll know you have nothing

Why not simply lower taxes on businesses?

Well they would just funnel it to the executives.

I'd give lower taxes to companies who provide good wages, retirement, and benefits. Heck any business doing that could pay no taxes. Would be better than all the corporate welfare.

You'd give... ? That's exactly what government is doing today by trying to alter businesses behavior by giving tax breaks. That's where inequality is coming from. If all businesses (and in fact all taxpayers) are treated the same and pay the same taxes, we wouldn't have this discussion today.

 

[The Rabbi]

If you say so chief.

You can prove me wrong any time now, sweetheart.

I provided more proof than you did, Buttercup.

You haven't provided any proof. Hell, you've never stated what the problem is.
And you're not my type anyway.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Breitbart? Doesn't anyone even think of using non-partisan resources for their news? I guess not.
The problem is the income growth is staying at the top. Wages are flat. Who determines wages? Who helped create this mess by shipping jobs out of the country?

Diamond Dave thinks "The only ones responsible for 'fixing inequality' are those who feel that they are not getting what they want or deserve..."
Surely Dave jests.
So it's the workers fault and the government's fault, right?
Yet, as productivity grew wages fell way behind. Yet when profits grew, wages remained generally flat. As taxes on Capital Gains and Dividends dropped, shipping jobs offshore grew. This all happened under deregulating Republicans and regulating Democrats.
The bottom line is this is not only hurting the US's most populated sector (the middle class/poor working classes, it's hurting the economy of America!
How Income Inequality Is Damaging the U.S.
How Income Inequality Is Damaging the U.S. - Forbes

Below are three charts dealing with worker productivity and wage growth, profit growth versus wage growth in Real Dollars and the off-shoring of American jobs.

You couldn't just say here's another take on it and then post the link from Forbes?
so what was wrong with the article from Breitbart?

Forbes is not liberal, it's conservative. Please go to Conservapedia Website's list of conservative media:
Conservative media - Conservapedia
What's wrong with Breitbart? It's nothing but far right opinion. It's as balanced as the HuffPost!

In other words, you have no idea what was "wrong" with it, because you didn't bother to read it. You just saw, "Breitbart", stuck your fingers in your ears, and started shouting talking points as loudly as you could.

 

[The Rabbi]

How about we just create a VAT to replace the corp tax and provide some minimal incentives for domestic labor.

The biggest problem with our corp tax is how it relates to foreign trade.

Wow stunningly wrong. VATs never work. ALl the Euro countries started off with VATs of 2-3% and are now up to about 20%.
The biggest problem with the corp tax rate is that it is higher than all of our competitors, and it applies to money earned overseas.
How about a flat tax to replace most of this?

 

[Brain357]

Why not simply lower taxes on businesses?

Well they would just funnel it to the executives.

I'd give lower taxes to companies who provide good wages, retirement, and benefits. Heck any business doing that could pay no taxes. Would be better than all the corporate welfare.

You'd give... ? That's exactly what government is doing today by trying to alter businesses behavior by giving tax breaks. That's where inequality is coming from. If all businesses (and in fact all taxpayers) are treated the same and pay the same taxes, we wouldn't have this discussion today.

How would that keep the rich from shipping jobs overseas and creating low paying jobs here with little or no benefits?