"Income Inequality": So What?

[The Rabbi]

]


That's a nice theory.



When the free market fails to provide a solution to income equality, the government solution, other than protecting the rights of employees, is pretty damn simple. Tax the filthy rich more and the middle class less. The power to tax income is found in the 16th amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

There is no "solution" to income equality required. Certainly not by gov't action. That is like providing a solution to inequality in piano performance by cutting off fingers from more talented practitioners.
There is no problem here that anyone can identify.

To expect this corporate run govt to do anything for anyone in the bottom 99% is dreaming and/or asleep.

You're right. I dont expect gov't to do anything for me. I don't want gov't to do anything for me. Every time they try to do something for people at the bottom, they screw it up worse and people are worse off.
You are always looking for someone to do somethign for you, though.

 

[DGS49]

Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution articulates ALL of the powers that Congress has to spend money. The Tenth Amendment reserves all powers not delegated to the Federal government, "...to the states respectively, or to the people."

Thus, Congress lacks the power to tax individuals (or corporations) for the purpose of supplementing the incomes of those at the bottom, whether such supplementation is in cash or in kind (free food stamps, free housing, free anything). Much of what the Federal Government does now is unconstitutional and, ironically, would not pass constitutional muster under the guidelines articulated by CJ Roberts in the ObamaCare decision.

(Parenthetical: The terms, "fortunate" and "less fortunate" drive me crazy. Most people making a lot of money are able to do so because they have educated themselves either formally or informally, and have worked their asses off. Most people making MW and thereabouts are at that level because that is equivalent to the economic value of their labor. "Fortunate" and "unfortunate" have nothing to do with it. It is a nauseating liberal conceit to refer to those with high incomes as "fortunate," because it denies the worth of their efforts. And the same is true at the other end of the spectrum. Some are wealthy because they are fortunate and vice versa, but in the majority of cases, people have wealth and incomes that befit their talents and perseverence. Luck has little to do with it).

The "death of the middle class" is not just liberal mouth flatulence. I am old enough to remember when a HS grad with little ambition could amble on down to the local steel mill, construction site, or manufacturing shop and, with the help of a strong union, be set for life by age 25. He would have a non-working wife, a couple kids, a house, and a new pickup truck, and rest easy at night knowing he could essentially never lose his job, and he could retire at age 55 or so with a guaranteed lifetime pension.

The "global economy" has killed this life style (unless you work for GM or Chrysler, or the [*******] Government), and there is NOTHING the United States government can do to bring it back. Pretending that any government program will restore this middle class option - and this is what they are talking about - is absolute nonsense, and those who pathetically cling to the Democrat Party and "progressive" promises of prosperity for the "poor" are as clueless as Lenny dreaming about the rabbit farm in Steinbeck's novel, "Of Mice and Men."

 

[Fordsflylow]

There is no "solution" to income equality required. Certainly not by gov't action. That is like providing a solution to inequality in piano performance by cutting off fingers from more talented practitioners.
There is no problem here that anyone can identify.

To expect this corporate run govt to do anything for anyone in the bottom 99% is dreaming and/or asleep.

You're right. I dont expect gov't to do anything for me. I don't want gov't to do anything for me. Every time they try to do something for people at the bottom, they screw it up worse and people are worse off.
You are always looking for someone to do somethign for you, though.

This is not our govt, so until the majority of People take it back from the minority running it nothing will change for the better for those who do not have $ which = speech.

 

[Fordsflylow]

This is not capitalism. This is an oligarchy, a grand pyramid scheme. The scum at the top want to hold onto their wealth, which is more than they will ever need. They know they cannot sway public opinion in their favor without tricking blue collar folks into buying the bs they are giving away. Apparently it is working from the clueless bs I read here coming from the right.

 

[rightwinger]

Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution articulates ALL of the powers that Congress has to spend money. The Tenth Amendment reserves all powers not delegated to the Federal government, "...to the states respectively, or to the people."

Thus, Congress lacks the power to tax individuals (or corporations) for the purpose of supplementing the incomes of those at the bottom, whether such supplementation is in cash or in kind (free food stamps, free housing, free anything). Much of what the Federal Government does now is unconstitutional and, ironically, would not pass constitutional muster under the guidelines articulated by CJ Roberts in the ObamaCare decision.

(Parenthetical: The terms, "fortunate" and "less fortunate" drive me crazy. Most people making a lot of money are able to do so because they have educated themselves either formally or informally, and have worked their asses off. Most people making MW and thereabouts are at that level because that is equivalent to the economic value of their labor. "Fortunate" and "unfortunate" have nothing to do with it. It is a nauseating liberal conceit to refer to those with high incomes as "fortunate," because it denies the worth of their efforts. And the same is true at the other end of the spectrum. Some are wealthy because they are fortunate and vice versa, but in the majority of cases, people have wealth and incomes that befit their talents and perseverence. Luck has little to do with it).

The "death of the middle class" is not just liberal mouth flatulence. I am old enough to remember when a HS grad with little ambition could amble on down to the local steel mill, construction site, or manufacturing shop and, with the help of a strong union, be set for life by age 25. He would have a non-working wife, a couple kids, a house, and a new pickup truck, and rest easy at night knowing he could essentially never lose his job, and he could retire at age 55 or so with a guaranteed lifetime pension.

The "global economy" has killed this life style (unless you work for GM or Chrysler, or the [*******] Government), and there is NOTHING the United States government can do to bring it back. Pretending that any government program will restore this middle class option - and this is what they are talking about - is absolute nonsense, and those who pathetically cling to the Democrat Party and "progressive" promises of prosperity for the "poor" are as clueless as Lenny dreaming about the rabbit farm in Steinbeck's novel, "Of Mice and Men."

16th Amendment: The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.

 

[gallantwarrior]

How about those koch punks. Did they work harder and smarter OR did they have everything handed to them on a silver platter?

Someone had to buy the silver platter. Are you one of those who think when you die, the government should get all of your assets?

Not all but much of. They didn't scam...er...earn it! Name me all those rich kids who grew to be adults and did well for others with the money they've been handed? You know, to use as a healthy example of how it is good they get to keep the riches dada or mama made. Please do!

You are one twisted libturd, buddy. Just why shouldn't mommy and daddy pass their earnings on to their children. Here's a question for you, just what legitimate claim does anyone else have on those earnings that would justify taking them away from the children who inherited them?

 

[gallantwarrior]

Someone had to buy the silver platter. Are you one of those who think when you die, the government should get all of your assets?

Not all but much of. They didn't scam...er...earn it! Name me all those rich kids who grew to be adults and did well for others with the money they've been handed? You know, to use as a healthy example of how it is good they get to keep the riches dada or mama made. Please do!

So you see a problem with parents leaving their wealth for their children just like they would a couch or dining room table? Really? Shouldn't the person who built that wealth be able to say what happens to it when they are gone? Tell the class, why should the government be entitled to confiscate it?

Good question, do you think we'll get an answer?

 

[Fordsflylow]

Not all but much of. They didn't scam...er...earn it! Name me all those rich kids who grew to be adults and did well for others with the money they've been handed? You know, to use as a healthy example of how it is good they get to keep the riches dada or mama made. Please do!

So you see a problem with parents leaving their wealth for their children just like they would a couch or dining room table? Really? Shouldn't the person who built that wealth be able to say what happens to it when they are gone? Tell the class, why should the government be entitled to confiscate it?

Good question, do you think we'll get an answer?

Worry not con lover. The upper 1% MINORITY has a firm grasp on their govt and will save the day for their own.

 

[gallantwarrior]

The more one makes the more a % they pay in taxes to help the folks who they stole $ from to begin with. After all if it weren't for this grand pyramid scheme that is skewed in their favor and NOT capitalism, they wouldn't be well off.

I have to call bullshit on that statement. Stole? Really? What exactly has your employer stole from you? It's his company, his product, his risk and his profit. He's paying you a going rate for your time and experience. Somes jobs pay more than others because any moron can dig a hole with a shovel while it takes a very intelligent person with years of training to do brain surgery. There is no theft going on. Theft implies your company is taking something away from you that you owned. Are you being forced to work for your employer? Can you not seek employment elsewhere that doesn't "steal" from their employees? Are you incapable of starting your own company where you won't be stolen from? You liberal need to quit using the term theft if you don't know how to use it correctly in a sentence.

Call it all you want. Freedom of speech and all Ya, stole AND continue to steal! Didn't stutter! My past employers have stole my lively hood, broke my back and paid me a pittance in comparison to my worth. When I was broke (both monetarily and physically) the govt they now own didn't give a rats ass about me or anyone like me. Worker's comp is also a scam and full of fraud, but not at the individual's level, no, it's at the mega-corp/govt level but that info is not readily available to the avg joe/jane. That's a whole entire reality in and of itself that I won't waste my time going into.

I will say this on the subject though, google/yahoo/ask "worker comp fraud" sometime and see what initially comes up. See if it isn't specifically about individuals, OR corporations (i.e. insurance corp's, mega-corp's, etc.). One has to dig deep to find the corporate fraud which is actually much much worse than is the individual's fraud, BUT the miniscule individual's fraud is easy to access.

Now back to the reply. Ever hear/read of snake oil salesman? Do I REALLY need to spell it all out? They still exist but now they wear three piece suits and sip three martini lunches while playing 18 holes at some posh course. Are tv commercials full of truth, OR lies/half-truths/misleading info....etc....etc. Ya steal!!

How exactly is one at blue collar level NOT forced to work? Please explain. There's really no choice! The choice is starve or work. When one works it's all about production NOT quality/care for the employee, you know (or likely not) assholes and elbows.

Wahhabi! Cry us a river. Oh, wait, the water level is already knee deep...and rising.

 

[Fordsflylow]

Wow, that was a whole lotta nothing.

 

[DGS49]

Dear Rightwinger: There is no question about the right of Congress to TAX; the issue is about what they have the power to spend the money on.

NPR? Fahgeddaboudtit. Income redistribution? No copulating way.

 

[The Rabbi]

To expect this corporate run govt to do anything for anyone in the bottom 99% is dreaming and/or asleep.

You're right. I dont expect gov't to do anything for me. I don't want gov't to do anything for me. Every time they try to do something for people at the bottom, they screw it up worse and people are worse off.
You are always looking for someone to do somethign for you, though.

This is not our govt, so until the majority of People take it back from the minority running it nothing will change for the better for those who do not have $ which = speech.

Really? Whose government is it? Did you not vote in the last election? Was Obama not chosen by the EC, chosen in turn by voters? Was Congress not voted on member by member in each state?

 

[rightwinger]

Dear Rightwinger: There is no question about the right of Congress to TAX; the issue is about what they have the power to spend the money on.

NPR? Fahgeddaboudtit. Income redistribution? No copulating way.

They have a mandate to spend on the General Welfare of the nation. That is a fairly broad criteria. Can you point to a single court case where social spending at the federal level has been declared unconstitutional?

 

[Dante]

"Income Inequality" has been the most often-heard catchphrase for today's Progressives...

WRONG!!!

I'm no great fan of all things progressive, or of most Progressives, but I'll rise to their defense here. Income inequality as a term, as you spin it, looks nothing like the term used by most credible and reasonable people.

The wealth gap. The income of the highest-paid Americans has soared while the income of the rest of Americans has grown little. The widening gap is cause for concern in all economic systems, but especially the economic system of a Capitalist Democracy, because killing off the middle class will make America a banana republic.

To have a middle class, there cannot be too wide a gap between those at the top and the rest of society, for when that happens there is just the wealthy and the struggling: the haves and the have nots.

America in the late 19th and early 20th centuries was not so great a place to live for most Americans and immigrants, pre-FDR. Anyone who wants to argue that is welcome to have their butts kicked and handed to them on a plate of crow.

So it's not an income gap, it's a wealth gap. And the wealth gap is caused by disparity in incomes.
Really? Seriously?
America was a great place. That's why the largest immigration in the US in history occurred between about 1870 and 1930.

Yeah, the streets were paved with gold.

You should be ashamed of yourself for posing as a Jew and then spreading propaganda about things. DO you know where the inscription on the Statue of Liberty comes from? A Jew. A wealthy Jew who was appalled (Newt's favorite word) at the squalid conditions Jewish refugees to the New World were made to live in.

Fundraising for the statue had begun in 1882. The committee organized a large number of money-raising events. As part of one such effort, an auction of art and manuscripts, poet Emma Lazarus was asked to donate an original work. She initially declined, stating she could not write a poem about a statue. At the time, she was also involved in aiding refugees to New York who had fled anti-Semitic pogroms in eastern Europe. These refugees were forced to live in conditions that the wealthy Lazarus had never experienced. She saw a way to express her empathy for these refugees in terms of the statue. The resulting sonnet, "The New Colossus", including the iconic lines "Give me your tired, your poor/Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free", is uniquely identified with the Statue of Liberty and is inscribed on a plaque in the museum in the base.

Statue of Liberty - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Dante]

Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free;
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore,
Send these, the homeless,
Tempest-tossed to me

 

[kwc57]

This is not capitalism. This is an oligarchy, a grand pyramid scheme. The scum at the top want to hold onto their wealth, which is more than they will ever need. They know they cannot sway public opinion in their favor without tricking blue collar folks into buying the bs they are giving away. Apparently it is working from the clueless bs I read here coming from the right.

I'm tired of listening to you spew your bitter, wealth envy bullshit. Why don't you give us a little historical perspective on your particular experiences. I'm betting you dropped out of high school and have worked a succession of entry level jobs thinking you were going to "make a living". I'd be interested to know the actual truth, so spill it.

There is a way to get ahead in America and it hasn't changed. You behave and keep your nose clean, you develop a real work ethic starting with a minimum wage job as a kid, you work smarter and harder and make yourself stand out to your management, you get an education in a field that is in demand and pays well. You get a job in that field and use your knowledge, experience and work ethic to move up and get ahead.

The term "working hard" is meaningless. Moving one heavy rock from one place to another is "hard work", but it won't put a roof over your head or food in your belly. There will always be grunt labor jobs that are "hard" that won't pay much money because any fool can do them.

 

[kwc57]

Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free;
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore,
Send these, the homeless,
Tempest-tossed to me

Notice it doesn't say that it would tax the filthy, evil, rich bastards to care for those huddled masses cradle to grave. We offer everyone the same thing, an equal opportunity to make something of themselves and for themselves........even to become filthy, evil, rich bastards.

 

[Dante]

.

I've never understood the reasoning behind waiting for or expecting someone else, especially a professional freakin' politician, to "do" something for me.

.

really? who is waiting for this?

 

[Dante]

I not only do not object to income inequality, I endorse it.

I don't want to make the same amount of money as some derp who can barely fill the order at McDonalds.

I don't think a surgeon necessarily needs to make the same amount that I make or the kid in McDonalds makes.

I WANT there to be a financial INCENTIVE to wrok better, harder, faster and more productively. I WANT skill and effort and cleverness and productivity etc to be REWARDED.

The mindless rhetoric of the left about "income inequality" is absurd. It's like those mutants are marching around in a circle, carrying placards that demand an end to progress.

Such libs are derps.

You and the ******* morons who agreed with this post (gallantwarrior (Today), kwc57 (Today), The Rabbi (Today)) live in a fantasy world.

Throwing out absurdist bullshit may make you feel better, but all it does is expose your ignorance and stupidity.

No one has ever proposed a surgeon make the same as a laborer or the other way around. You just make shit up.

 

[regent]

At one time there was policy called Utility of Poverty, in short it recognized that poverty for much of the population can be of benefit to some. Poverty or recessions/depressions it recognized caused money to increase in value, labor costs were lower, prices on material goods were lower and the dollars, if one has them would buy much more. The problem with depressions, however, is that the populations can get upset after a time and begin to make unpleasant noises.
Utility of poverty, and America doesn't practice it, gave reasons why people were poor and yet some rich. Poor people were lazy, drank a lot, were slothful, and didn't eat their veggies, rich people worked hard and were endowed with special skills given to them by that great employer in the sky. Still, I often wonder if some people profit by a recession?