Perhaps "thereisnospoon" would care to explain how 66% of the total income gains generated in America between 2002 to 2007 went into the pockets of the top 1%. Even if it was possible for such a small select group to work 24/7/365, there aren't enough hours in the day to work that smart and that hard to justify 1% earning 2/3 of all the income gains during that period.The reality is that there has already been a massive redistribution of wealth in America over the last decade - all of it seeming to favor a select few, the top 1%.During the economic expansion between 2002 and 2007, the income of the top 1% grew 10 times faster than the income of the bottom 90%.
In this period 66% of total income gains went to the 1%, who in 2007 had a larger share of total income than at any time since 1928.
The Great Recession (2007) also caused a drop of 36.1% in median household wealth but a drop of only 11.1% for the top 1%, further widening the gap between the 1% and the 99%.
Distribution of wealth - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
During 2012 and previous elections, when such inequalities come under public scrutiny, Americans should be aware that the top 1% is actively using its power and wealth in an effort to systematically discredit any attempts to seriously question its privileged position.
These attacks rely strictly on the subjective, emptional and ideological approach while deliberately avoiding the use of statistical data like the plague - afterall what member of the top !% really wants to explain why his/her income deserved to grow 10X faster between 2002 and 2007 than any of the rest of us.
You lefties keep trying to spin this issue.
The fact is those who work hard, work smart have great ideas and are willing to take risks ARE earning more. That is a cold hard fact"thereisnospoon" of life.
"Redistribution" is a deliberate act. Essentially it is the act of taking.
Higher earners are not taking from anyone.
If one could place ten people in a room from all levels of income with the person with the highest, take $900k of his $1million and give each of the other 9 people $100k, eventually the person who had the million would find a way to earn another $1 million while the poorest of the people in the group would most likely end up squandering the $100k and end up with nothing.
It is not possible to make a poor person rich by simply giving them money. Eventually, a poor person will end up being poor.
Footnote: Unlike Barack Obama, Mitt Romney was born with a "silver spoon in his mouth." What evidence can "thereisnospoon" provide to show that Mitt worked harder, longer, had more "great ideas" and was "willing to take risks" more than millions of other Americans?
What about the hundreds of thousands of young Americans who have served in Iraq and Afghanistan facing more risks in a single day than Mitt Romney will see in a lifetime - did they come home feeling they were entitled to 66% of all the income gains generated in America over the last 5 years?
Last edited: