Incomes up and Poverty Down in 2019

kaz

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 1, 2010
Messages
60,780
Reaction score
10,455
Points
2,040
Location
Kazmania
Good question, definitely worthy of a national discussion. My opinion, no one should make more than $500,000
OK, so how did you arrive at that number? What is magical about $500K that you think job providers should stop creating jobs and go home after they make that?

What about all the people who lose their jobs because we do that? Or you just like government dependency.

Who are you going to plunder then once we don't have the money to pay all the taxes we pay, Joe?
 

kaz

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 1, 2010
Messages
60,780
Reaction score
10,455
Points
2,040
Location
Kazmania
You realize that was because of Democrats, right? Republicans support vouchers
Vouchers are a scam. It's just more White People Welfare.
So when blacks want to put their kids in better schools, that is "white people welfare." Got it.

Ronald Reagan: It's not that leftists are ignorant so much as they know so much that just isn't so

Skin color is all you think about, isn't it?
 

Ray From Cleveland

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2015
Messages
63,365
Reaction score
13,234
Points
2,290
Or we just realize that we have an obligation to our less fortunate members and redistribute the wealth fairly and evenly. There's an idea.
Well Joe,it works like this:

If the federal income tax rate were 0%, the federal government collects 0 dollars. If the federal income tax rate were 100%, the federal government still collects 0 dollars, because who would be stupid enough to create wealth?

If you're going to pay an engineer the same as a UPS driver, there's no point in spending the money, spending the time, do all the studying to be an engineer. If you want to start a company, but law only allowed you to make twice as much as your employees, what's the point of opening up that company? It's just too much work, too much worry, and too much risk involved.

Actually, what the insurance companies did was hire a bunch of people to find new ways to cheat you after you paid in your money. It's why private insurance needs to go.

We spend 17% of our GDP on health care compared to the rest of the industrialized world, which spends 8-11%. We have the worst results in every health care metric despite spending more money. But dumb shits like you are happy to have no insurance because you don't want "those people" to get it, either.
No, what insurance companies do is take your premium money, invest it, and use the profits to help offset claims. Government doesn't do that. Government takes our money and stuffs it between two mattresses until needed.

Stock wise, insurance companies provide some of the lowest returns on your money because insurance companies don't make a huge amount of profit, especially those that provide health insurance. They are really secure investments, but not huge payers.

Insurance is only a small part of our unaffordable healthcare in the US. Most of our costs are because of government, and it's stupid to insist the people that caused the problem be the solution to it. Malpractice is so costly in our country because everybody is looking for a lottery ticket. While most claims are never paid, it still costs a lot of money for an insurance company to defend their doctors and nurses.

If we had a loser pays all law like they do in some parts of Europe, that would keep the ambulance chasers at home. Sue anybody you want, but if you lose, you are responsible for all the costs associated with the entity you tried to sue.
 

Ray From Cleveland

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2015
Messages
63,365
Reaction score
13,234
Points
2,290
Actually, they kind of do that now if you live in a homeowner's association... but never mind.
No, it doesn't work that way. In a homeowners association, they provide you the bushes. You don't plant them yourself or pay for them outside of your maintenance fee. My sister is not allowed to plant anything in her front yard. Whatever they allow her to plant in the backyard, they don't take care of. However they will not come to your home and take anything off your property to give to somebody else because you have too much of it.

Mostly because the money isn't distributed fairly, as even you admit when you whine about actresses.
I'm not crying about anything. I simply asked you a question. I think people should be allowed to make as much as the market will pay them, and it's not government or people's business to interfere with how much they make. That's what they do in places like Cuba.
 

Ray From Cleveland

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2015
Messages
63,365
Reaction score
13,234
Points
2,290
Sure and they are in trouble for it because what they did was illegal.
Um, yeah... She went to a club fed for 11 days. Meanwhile the poor black lady who used her babysitter's address to get her kid into a better school got five years.
That's because the only thing she did was cheat. She didn't steal from the taxpayers.
 

kaz

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 1, 2010
Messages
60,780
Reaction score
10,455
Points
2,040
Location
Kazmania
Actually, they kind of do that now if you live in a homeowner's association... but never mind.
No, it doesn't work that way. In a homeowners association, they provide you the bushes. You don't plant them yourself or pay for them outside of your maintenance fee. My sister is not allowed to plant anything in her front yard. Whatever they allow her to plant in the backyard, they don't take care of. However they will not come to your home and take anything off your property to give to somebody else because you have too much of it.
That may or may not be true. I've lived with a lot of homeowners associations and they have different rules. Some only take care of common areas. You're responsible for your own yard. Some as you say are responsible for everything outside, even the structure of your home. And there's everything in between.

You have to read the homeowner agreement carefully before signing
 
OP
DBA

DBA

Platinum Member
Joined
May 10, 2015
Messages
2,823
Reaction score
1,801
Points
940
Good question, definitely worthy of a national discussion. My opinion, no one should make more than $500,000.
Ridiculous

Nobody buys a product because of anything the CEO does.
Yes they do. CEO's have several responsibilities, one of which is to decide the direction of the company and create long-term strategies, which includes product direction. For example, if the CEO of Apple had decided not to purse the smart phone, the iPhone and many of its competitors wouldn't exist.
 

Ray From Cleveland

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2015
Messages
63,365
Reaction score
13,234
Points
2,290
Good question, definitely worthy of a national discussion. My opinion, no one should make more than $500,000.
Your comment gives me a flashback to my old job.

When the lottery jackpot got large enough, I started a company pool. I would collect money and go out to buy about 150 numbers. Like most lottery players, we kept an eye on what was happening. We had people who were politically right, politically left, and some in the middle.

At the end of the day, we would hang around the office to BS from time to time. One of our drivers was reading the paper. He said "If we hit tonight, we will get 130 million dollars. Out of that, we have to pay X taxes, and after we divide the money up, each of us gets X dollars.

The leftists in our group were outraged. They said "Government will take that much from us!! That isn't fair!!" I just had to laugh. Paying huge taxes is always a great idea when it isn't your money to take.


I'd be fine with limiting that. Thing is, a "Famous Actress" is more like a coporation. She gets 10 million and then it's distributed to her entire staff. But to the point, if you are going to see a movie, it's because that actor is in it, if you are going to a ball game, it's because that pitcher is winning. Nobody buys a product because of anything the CEO does.
There would be no product to buy without a CEO. There would be nobody to deal with the business issues, raising funds for the stadium, organizing the work groups, dealing with tax issues and politicians.

Nobody goes to the ball park because the peanuts are that good.
I think you are starting to learn something Joe. Correct, nobody is going to the ball park for the peanuts. That's why the peanut vender makes 1/1000 th of what the star pitcher makes. The CEO is the pitcher, and the workers are the peanut vendors.
 

Ray From Cleveland

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2015
Messages
63,365
Reaction score
13,234
Points
2,290
OK, so how did you arrive at that number? What is magical about $500K that you think job providers should stop creating jobs and go home after they make that?
This is how confused people on the left are. If 500K was the maximum you could make, people like Joe think that when you make more, you will simply have to give it to your workers. What he doesn't understand is nobody works harder to make more money they'd have to give away. They would sooner not make it.
 
  • Thanks
Reactions: kaz

AzogtheDefiler

The Pale Orc
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Aug 4, 2018
Messages
31,802
Reaction score
8,614
Points
1,340
Location
Boston, MA
You realize that was because of Democrats, right? Republicans support vouchers
Vouchers are a scam. It's just more White People Welfare.
So when blacks want to put their kids in better schools, that is "white people welfare." Got it.

Ronald Reagan: It's not that leftists are ignorant so much as they know so much that just isn't so

Skin color is all you think about, isn't it?
JoeB is mentally ill. Good luck to you. He doesn’t understand basic economic concepts. He thinks all whites are racist. Odd person.
 

kaz

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 1, 2010
Messages
60,780
Reaction score
10,455
Points
2,040
Location
Kazmania
OK, so how did you arrive at that number? What is magical about $500K that you think job providers should stop creating jobs and go home after they make that?
This is how confused people on the left are. If 500K was the maximum you could make, people like Joe think that when you make more, you will simply have to give it to your workers. What he doesn't understand is nobody works harder to make more money they'd have to give away. They would sooner not make it.
I keep pointing out to Joe that as a Marxist, he thinks that self organizing groups are the most efficient. But actually his socialist system would never allow businesses to operate without government control. That while capitalism would freely allow him to start a self organizing company. But he doesn't. He just keeps advocating government commit armed robbery and redistribute. But if self organizing teams were more effective, that would totally not be necessary
 

Ray From Cleveland

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2015
Messages
63,365
Reaction score
13,234
Points
2,290
OK, so how did you arrive at that number? What is magical about $500K that you think job providers should stop creating jobs and go home after they make that?
This is how confused people on the left are. If 500K was the maximum you could make, people like Joe think that when you make more, you will simply have to give it to your workers. What he doesn't understand is nobody works harder to make more money they'd have to give away. They would sooner not make it.
I keep pointing out to Joe that as a Marxist, he thinks that self organizing groups are the most efficient. But actually his socialist system would never allow businesses to operate without government control. That while capitalism would freely allow him to start a self organizing company. But he doesn't. He just keeps advocating government commit armed robbery and redistribute. But if self organizing teams were more effective, that would totally not be necessary
We've only been around a couple hundred years, yet we've managed to become the world super power and the richest country in the world. We didn't do that through Socialism. People leave Socialist countries to come here because there are few if any opportunities where they're from. You don't really get just rewards for success. You might live a little better than everybody else in some places, but if your goal is to be filthy rich, you will never accomplish it there.

Unions failed in this country not because of Republicans, but because there was no motivation to work. As long as you show up and are breathing, you get paid the same as if you went there and busted your ass. It didn't do you any good to out perform your fellow worker because promotions were based on union tenure and not accomplishments.

When I drove tractor-trailer and went to a company I knew nothing about, I could tell you within ten minutes if they were union or not based on their performance and attitude. Leftists would like us to be like a unionized country where all you do is exist. There is no point in taking huge risks, busting your ass, or trying to get to the top because there is no top in Socialism unless you're in the government.

Joe said his arbitrary number for maximum income would be 500K. What would that do to our stock market where my IRA is at? What would it do to the lottery games and casinos in our country? What would it do to growing businesses? We're talking hundreds of billions of dollars here in lost revenue. That is leftist Socialism for you.
 
  • Thanks
Reactions: kaz

kaz

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 1, 2010
Messages
60,780
Reaction score
10,455
Points
2,040
Location
Kazmania
OK, so how did you arrive at that number? What is magical about $500K that you think job providers should stop creating jobs and go home after they make that?
This is how confused people on the left are. If 500K was the maximum you could make, people like Joe think that when you make more, you will simply have to give it to your workers. What he doesn't understand is nobody works harder to make more money they'd have to give away. They would sooner not make it.
I keep pointing out to Joe that as a Marxist, he thinks that self organizing groups are the most efficient. But actually his socialist system would never allow businesses to operate without government control. That while capitalism would freely allow him to start a self organizing company. But he doesn't. He just keeps advocating government commit armed robbery and redistribute. But if self organizing teams were more effective, that would totally not be necessary
We've only been around a couple hundred years, yet we've managed to become the world super power and the richest country in the world. We didn't do that through Socialism. People leave Socialist countries to come here because there are few if any opportunities where they're from. You don't really get just rewards for success. You might live a little better than everybody else in some places, but if your goal is to be filthy rich, you will never accomplish it there.

Unions failed in this country not because of Republicans, but because there was no motivation to work. As long as you show up and are breathing, you get paid the same as if you went there and busted your ass. It didn't do you any good to out perform your fellow worker because promotions were based on union tenure and not accomplishments.

When I drove tractor-trailer and went to a company I knew nothing about, I could tell you within ten minutes if they were union or not based on their performance and attitude. Leftists would like us to be like a unionized country where all you do is exist. There is no point in taking huge risks, busting your ass, or trying to get to the top because there is no top in Socialism unless you're in the government.

Joe said his arbitrary number for maximum income would be 500K. What would that do to our stock market where my IRA is at? What would it do to the lottery games and casinos in our country? What would it do to growing businesses? We're talking hundreds of billions of dollars here in lost revenue. That is leftist Socialism for you.
Most people want to have a good boss. The people in my businesses were very loyal. They wanted to ask me and get the answer to their business questions. They didn't want to figure it out themselves. They wanted a regular paycheck, not an unpredictable one as a slice of the pie. They liked that I made them king of their own kingdom, but they wanted no part of making decisions outside their own sphere.

What Joe claims is NOT what most people actually want. He doesn't either. He isn't acting on his Marxist utopian idea of a managementless company.

And sure as fuck, none of my employees wanted to put up all the $$$ I did to fund the business
 
Last edited:

JoeB131

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2011
Messages
126,614
Reaction score
12,954
Points
2,220
Location
Chicago, Chicago, that Toddling Town
OK, so how did you arrive at that number? What is magical about $500K that you think job providers should stop creating jobs and go home after they make that?

What about all the people who lose their jobs because we do that? Or you just like government dependency.
Guy, you work on a faulty premise the the "rich" create jobs. They don't. Consumer demand creates jobs. Therefore, if you distribute the wealth more fairly, you have more consumer demand.

We've only been around a couple hundred years, yet we've managed to become the world super power and the richest country in the world. We didn't do that through Socialism. People leave Socialist countries to come here because there are few if any opportunities where they're from. You don't really get just rewards for success. You might live a little better than everybody else in some places, but if your goal is to be filthy rich, you will never accomplish it there.
By that bizarre logic, we should follow Germany's model. Germany has only been around since 1870. (before that it was dozens of small principalities.) Yet in that time, and despite losing two world wars, it's still risen up to the world's third largest economy.

The thing is, we became a great power because of the "socialism" of the New Deal. It also helped the rest of the world crippled itself in WWII, while we were left relatively untouched. We've been pretty much in decline since the 1970's, when Tricky Dick got stupid white people to give up the New Deal out of fear the Darkies were going to get something. Just so you're clear, Ray, your the guy on the left.

1600864437000.png


Unions failed in this country not because of Republicans, but because there was no motivation to work. As long as you show up and are breathing, you get paid the same as if you went there and busted your ass. It didn't do you any good to out perform your fellow worker because promotions were based on union tenure and not accomplishments.
Unions failed in this country because the One Percenters made war on them.

Going back to the model of Germany. Germany has stronger unions and a higher level of unionization than we do. Their economy is a lot more productive. The rich pay their fair share, a German CEO does not make hundreds of times the salary of a line worker. Same thing with Japan. Now, if you used your "logic" about unions, they would be doing worse than we are, not better.

(Wait for it. Wait for it. Ray is going to make a comment about how they don't have black people.)

What Joe claims is NOT what most people actually want. He doesn't either. He isn't acting on his Marxist utopian idea of a managementless company.
Quite the contrary, I do think that someone should actually be in charge. The problem is, they shouldn't be able to abuse their employees.. They shouldn't be able to hold their health care for their family as leverage. And leadership should be based on MERIT.

What I loved about the Army is that it was a meritocracy. You got promoted based on skill and competence. Nobody made you a Colonel because your Daddy owned the company. Nobody got promoted to Sergeant because she was sleeping with the Colonel. Did we have some officers and NCO's who were absolute assholes? Yup.
 

Ray From Cleveland

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2015
Messages
63,365
Reaction score
13,234
Points
2,290
The thing is, we became a great power because of the "socialism" of the New Deal. It also helped the rest of the world crippled itself in WWII, while we were left relatively untouched. We've been pretty much in decline since the 1970's, when Tricky Dick got stupid white people to give up the New Deal out of fear the Darkies were going to get something. Just so you're clear, Ray, your the guy on the left.
The only thing the new deal did was put is in debt and give us unfunded liabilities in our future. The US is the wealthiest country in the world because we are one of the few with a reward system. You work, you invent, you invest, and with some luck, you will achieve your financial dream, sometimes beyond your beliefs.

It goes right back to the carrot and the stick analogy. Which horse will run faster, the one where you put a carrot on a stick in front of him, or the one you feed carrots to all day long? Nobody ever built wealth due to the new deal. It was through hard work.

Unions failed in this country because the One Percenters made war on them.

Going back to the model of Germany. Germany has stronger unions and a higher level of unionization than we do. Their economy is a lot more productive. The rich pay their fair share, a German CEO does not make hundreds of times the salary of a line worker. Same thing with Japan. Now, if you used your "logic" about unions, they would be doing worse than we are, not better.

(Wait for it. Wait for it. Ray is going to make a comment about how they don't have black people.)
Unions failed because unlike Germany, American consumers would not buy their own products. In the 80's, better purchasing options became available. and Americans decided to use those instead.

The legacy costs for a US vehicle is over 2K per car. You pay that money for people to sit home with subsidized healthcare coverage, sometimes at such an early age as 50 years old. So many of us American consumers bought Japanese cars without those costs, and your money instead went towards engineering and quality parts. I've had three Camrys in the last ten years or so. Never seen a tow truck, never been stranded anywhere. With 7 year bumper to bumper warranties, never paid a repair bill either.
 

LiberalsLIE

Gold Member
Joined
Sep 21, 2020
Messages
253
Reaction score
361
Points
158
Just a does of reality for all you Trump haters. The proof is again in the pudding. interestingly, look who benefited the most. But alas, these are the folks that are lock-step with the Democrats. Ignorance at best. We know it has taken a hit due to COVID, but it can be fixed under Trump. It will plummet with Biden.

Real median incomes of white, Black, Asian, and Hispanic households all increased from the prior year. Lower-income households did particularly well after missing out on income gains earlier in the expansion. The mean income of the lowest fifth of households rose 9% last year, a larger gain than for any other quintile of households.

U.S. Incomes Up, Poverty Rate Down in 2019
Money talks
 

JoeB131

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2011
Messages
126,614
Reaction score
12,954
Points
2,220
Location
Chicago, Chicago, that Toddling Town
he only thing the new deal did was put is in debt and give us unfunded liabilities in our future. The US is the wealthiest country in the world because we are one of the few with a reward system. You work, you invent, you invest, and with some luck, you will achieve your financial dream, sometimes beyond your beliefs.
We had no problem funding it and a lot more until Reagan decided to give away the store to the rich. Heck, even the MODERATE tax increases Clinton did gave us balanced budgets.

It goes right back to the carrot and the stick analogy. Which horse will run faster, the one where you put a carrot on a stick in front of him, or the one you feed carrots to all day long? Nobody ever built wealth due to the new deal. It was through hard work.
Actually, it's a stupid analogy. I've never seen anyone put a carrot in front of a horse on a stick. The reality was, the New Deal worked because people were motivated to work harder because they were seeing the benefits. Then they spent more, creating more jobs.

Compare America in the 1920's to America in the 1950's, you can see the difference.

Unions failed because unlike Germany, American consumers would not buy their own products. In the 80's, better purchasing options became available. and Americans decided to use those instead.
But WHY didn't Americans buy their own stuff? Again, it's a difference in ATTITUDES. The Germans and Japanese focused on QUALITY. The American companies focused on profitability. It wasn't a union guy who decided to make the Ford Pinto, and then refused to recall it because it was cheaper to pay out a few families that burned to death than the millions of $11.00 repairs for a total recall.

The America CEO wanted a bigger return, the German CEO wanted to make a better car. It's not just that the Americans refused to buy American cars, it's that no one else really wanted them, either.

The legacy costs for a US vehicle is over 2K per car. You pay that money for people to sit home with subsidized healthcare coverage, sometimes at such an early age as 50 years old. So many of us American consumers bought Japanese cars without those costs, and your money instead went towards engineering and quality parts. I've had three Camrys in the last ten years or so. Never seen a tow truck, never been stranded anywhere. With 7 year bumper to bumper warranties, never paid a repair bill either.
Okay, but then you fail to realize WHY American cars have those 'legacy costs". The Germans and Japanese have - wait for it - universal health care. They don't have to tack on the expense of worker's insurance to each and every car.

It's amazing that on some level, even you know what we are doing doesn't work... but you go for the most illogical solution you can find.
 

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top