study wealth distribution: Gains of wealthy hurts the rest

[Truthmatters]

Excuse me but if i buy X shares of stock and someone else buys Y shares of the same stock then by your definition X+Y number of shares must be taken from someone else.

You are wrong. Both people increased their assets and no one had any assets taken from them.

the person who sold it to you no longer has it.

Why dont you try reading the study and then telling me what you think about the real study?

You believe that 'selling' is the same as 'taking from'?

You're bon-a-fide moron.

Lying about what I said is not a good way to start a debate.

 

[Truthmatters]

Lies and personal insults does not negate what this study found.

This study found that As teh wealth in this nation concentrates into fewer and fewer hands the quality of life for the poor and middle decreases.


Being that we are a democracy why is it the wealthy just keep getting more and more breaks from our government at the expense of the vast majority of our people?

 

[Truthmatters]

If Americans continue to allow the wealthy to become wealthier then they are allowing their standard of living to fall.

How is that a good bet for Americans?

 

[Warrior102]

so you suggest that EVERYONE get a grad degree?

It helps, in addition to the other things I suggested.

Oh yes - be creative and think for yourself too. And work long hours.

How much does a grad degree cost?

what would be the value of a grad degree if EVERY worker had one?

They're quite expensive.

Perhaps you should ask the government for fincial aid, on top of the food stamps and other freebies you're already receiving.

 

[Zoom-boing]

Excuse me but if i buy X shares of stock and someone else buys Y shares of the same stock then by your definition X+Y number of shares must be taken from someone else.

You are wrong. Both people increased their assets and no one had any assets taken from them.

the person who sold it to you no longer has it.

Why dont you try reading the study and then telling me what you think about the real study?

You believe that 'selling' is the same as 'taking from'?

You're bon-a-fide moron.

Lying about what I said is not a good way to start a debate.

I notice you don't bother denying what you posted, you just automatically call me a liar. Your m.o. is old.

Explain your response to Skull's post.

 

[hboats]

If Americans continue to allow the wealthy to become wealthier then they are allowing their standard of living to fall.

How is that a good bet for Americans?

So, what you're saying is that we as American's shouldn't allow people to get wealthy? Are you suggesting a cap on wealth? No person in American can own over "X" amount of assets/cash? Do you realize how socialistic that sounds?

Probably not, I mean look who I'm asking.

Rick

 

[Truthmatters]

You believe that 'selling' is the same as 'taking from'?

You're bon-a-fide moron.

Lying about what I said is not a good way to start a debate.

I notice you don't bother denying what you posted, you just automatically call me a liar. Your m.o. is old.

Explain your response to Skull's post.

you claimed I said something I didnt say and called me a name.

Why did you lie about what I said?

 

[hboats]

the person who sold it to you no longer has it.

Why dont you try reading the study and then telling me what you think about the real study?

Yes, and what does the person who SOLD it have in it's place?

Rick

 

[California Girl]

so is that what the study says Cali?

You didnt evern read the study or have a clue what it saiud huh?

It's a study, truth. You need to learn how to read and comprehend academic research. Then you would not consistently make a fool of yourself when discussing research outcomes.

 

[Truthmatters]

If Americans continue to allow the wealthy to become wealthier then they are allowing their standard of living to fall.

How is that a good bet for Americans?

So, what you're saying is that we as American's shouldn't allow people to get wealthy? Are you suggesting a cap on wealth? No person in American can own over "X" amount of assets/cash? Do you realize how socialistic that sounds?

Probably not, I mean look who I'm asking.

Rick

If you would read the study and quit pretending Im saying things that I am not saying then you woud have a chance at understanding

 

[Truthmatters]

so is that what the study says Cali?

You didnt evern read the study or have a clue what it saiud huh?

It's a study, truth. You need to learn how to read and comprehend academic research. Then you would not consistently make a fool of yourself when discussing research outcomes.

You still havent read it have you?

why not post in a thread you are actually interested in participating in?

 

[Zoom-boing]

Lying about what I said is not a good way to start a debate.

I notice you don't bother denying what you posted, you just automatically call me a liar. Your m.o. is old.

Explain your response to Skull's post.

you claimed I said something I didnt say and called me a name.

Why did you lie about what I said?

I claimed nothing, I asked a question (that you haven't bothered to answer).

The comment after my question? Well, it is you I'm talking to and the shoe fits.

Explain your comment to Skull's post.

 

[Truthmatters]

PERI: : Searching for the Supposed Benefits of Higher Inequality: Impacts of Rising Top Shares on the Standard of Living of Low and Middle-Income Families



The results of this study indicate that increases in the top share of income (whether of the top 10 percent or top one percent) lead to declines in the actual incomes (and earnings) of low and middle income households.

WHY DOES INEQUALITY LOWER
INCOMES?
There are a number of ways that increasing concentrations
of income and wealth could lead to lower income
and earnings among non-affluent households. For example,
if the rich spend a larger portion of their income
on luxury items, imports, travel, or in other ways that do
little to boost domestic demand, then concentrating
more income in fewer hands could undermine local and
regional economies. And when affluent households
invest in stocks, bonds, and privately-held corporations
in other states or countries, there is no obvious way
that the savings of the rich boost a particular state or
local economy. Ultimately, the basic economic behavior
of the rich could be steadily undermining the economic
conditions that supported rising incomes for low and
middle-income households for so many decades.
Another driver behind this trend is what Robert Reich
called the “secession of the successful”—the rise in affluent
families who live in gated communities, send their
children to private schools, and increasingly oppose
paying for public services. This segregation undermines
the tax base in lower-income communities making it
harder to afford schools and other public services.

 

[Rat in the Hat]

the person who sold it to you no longer has it.

Why dont you try reading the study and then telling me what you think about the real study?

Yes, and what does the person who SOLD it have in it's place?

Rick

Do you really expect her to be able to figure it out?

 

[hboats]

If Americans continue to allow the wealthy to become wealthier then they are allowing their standard of living to fall.

How is that a good bet for Americans?

So, what you're saying is that we as American's shouldn't allow people to get wealthy? Are you suggesting a cap on wealth? No person in American can own over "X" amount of assets/cash? Do you realize how socialistic that sounds?

Probably not, I mean look who I'm asking.

Rick

If you would read the study and quit pretending Im saying things that I am not saying then you woud have a chance at understanding

Oh, trust me, I understand completely what you're saying. And I've just summed it up perfectly. Why can't you refute what I posted?

When you read and understand the study that you linked, you can tell the rest of us to read it. I've read it, and understand that it is a STUDY, nothing more, nothing less. Any STUDY can be manipulated to achieve a wanted outcome. It's FACT.

The only person who doesn't understand that is you.

Rick

 

[Wiseacre]

What we have here is a far left institute commissioned by another far left organization (Center for American Progress) to write bullshit papers forwarding their point of view. Their so-called study is based on other studies, using the parts they wanted and ignoring the rest. In a word - BULLSHIT.

Same as reading something written by Krugman, or somebody like Limbaugh from the other side, you're not going to get an unbiased report. It's going to say what the CAP paid them to say, although I have no doubt the two individuals who wrote it believe every word. It is intellectual poppycock.

 

[California Girl]

so is that what the study says Cali?

You didnt evern read the study or have a clue what it saiud huh?

It's a study, truth. You need to learn how to read and comprehend academic research. Then you would not consistently make a fool of yourself when discussing research outcomes.

You still havent read it have you?

why not post in a thread you are actually interested in participating in?

I scanned it. And that scan - without even bothering to thoroughly review the outcomes - tells me that you have misunderstood it. Can you work out how I know that?

 

[hboats]

If Americans continue to allow the wealthy to become wealthier then they are allowing their standard of living to fall.

How is that a good bet for Americans?

So, what you're saying is that we as American's shouldn't allow people to get wealthy? Are you suggesting a cap on wealth? No person in American can own over "X" amount of assets/cash? Do you realize how socialistic that sounds?

Probably not, I mean look who I'm asking.

Rick

If you would read the study and quit pretending Im saying things that I am not saying then you woud have a chance at understanding

I'd like you to explain how this quote:

If Americans continue to allow the wealthy to become wealthier then they are allowing their standard of living to fall.

doesn't mean that we as American's need to not allow other American's to accumulate wealth. Sure sounds to me like that's exactly what you're saying.

Rick

 

[Truthmatters]

You all have claimed for years now that when the wealthy gain assets the middle class gain assests right?


These guys just proved that is not true.

Excuse me but if i buy X shares of stock and someone else buys Y shares of the same stock then by your definition X+Y number of shares must be taken from someone else.

You are wrong. Both people increased their assets and no one had any assets taken from them.

Assets were traded in this case.

One guy traded assets for cash.

That guy not longer has the stock does he?

yes they were taken from one persons blannce sheet and placed on anothers.

you infered it was theft NOT ME

 

[California Girl]

PERI: : Searching for the Supposed Benefits of Higher Inequality: Impacts of Rising Top Shares on the Standard of Living of Low and Middle-Income Families



The results of this study indicate that increases in the top share of income (whether of the top 10 percent or top one percent) lead to declines in the actual incomes (and earnings) of low and middle income households.

WHY DOES INEQUALITY LOWER
INCOMES?
There are a number of ways that increasing concentrations
of income and wealth could lead to lower income
and earnings among non-affluent households. For example,
if the rich spend a larger portion of their income
on luxury items, imports, travel, or in other ways that do
little to boost domestic demand, then concentrating
more income in fewer hands could undermine local and
regional economies. And when affluent households
invest in stocks, bonds, and privately-held corporations
in other states or countries, there is no obvious way
that the savings of the rich boost a particular state or
local economy. Ultimately, the basic economic behavior
of the rich could be steadily undermining the economic
conditions that supported rising incomes for low and
middle-income households for so many decades.
Another driver behind this trend is what Robert Reich
called the “secession of the successful”—the rise in affluent
families who live in gated communities, send their
children to private schools, and increasingly oppose
paying for public services. This segregation undermines
the tax base in lower-income communities making it
harder to afford schools and other public services.

Scattered within that overview is one really important word... it is repeated 3 times. Do you know what that word is?