'The Price Of Inequality'

[midcan5]

'American exceptionalism,' is that an ironic slogan or a clever cover?

In the past thirty years, since the so called Reagan revolution, inequality in America has grown. And yet even today among the haves and the have nots this fact is lost in propaganda. The chart at link shows the place inequality leads.

Chart of the day: the price of inequality


"Great inequality is the scourge of modern societies. We provide the evidence on each of eleven different health and social problems: physical health, mental health, drug abuse, education, imprisonment, obesity, social mobility, trust and community life, violence, teenage births, and child well-being. For all eleven of these health and social problems, outcomes are very substantially worse in more unequal societies." Richard Wilkinson/Kate Pickett The Evidence in Detail | The Equality Trust

.

 

[expat_panama]

...since the so called Reagan revolution, inequality in America has grown... ...physical health, mental health, drug abuse, education, imprisonment, obesity, social mobility, trust and community life, violence, teenage births, and child well-being. For all eleven of these health and social problems, outcomes are very substantially worse...

Seriously, saying (for example) life expectancy is worse now than 30 years ago --all because of Reagan--






Crazy. Absolutely bonkers.

 

[midcan5]

Since Reagan - one could argue it started before - not because of one person. Reading isn't your strong suit, nor is thought.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/30/b...m-by-donald-l-barlett-and-james-b-steele.html


"Nearly 13 million American children live in families with incomes below the federal poverty level, which is $20,000 a year for a family of four. The number of children living in poverty increased by more than 11 percent between 2000 and 2005. There are 1.3 million more children living in poverty today than in 2000, despite indications of economic recovery and growth." NCCP | Who are America’s Poor Children?


"Rector and Sheffield are right that we shouldn't take our society's material progress for granted. But the trouble with this line of reasoning is that Americans today don't live in the 1890s or another bygone era. And they generally don't reside in the bush of Botswana or some other impoverished land, either.

As is customary for humans, Americans inhabit a particular space and time. They live in communities and need access to the resources that will help them participate fully in those communities. This means they need basics, such as a decent-paying job, health insurance and retirement security. At present it also often means needing cell phones, computers and reliable cars.

The biblical social ethic reflects this sense of particularity. The Jewish prophets and Jesus were not bowled over by the fact that the poor of their times lived large compared to the cavemen. They spoke precisely against the marginalization of economically disadvantaged people within their social contexts." Relative poverty: Where Adam Smith and the Bible agree | The Christian Century

 

[expat_panama]

...life expectancy is worse now than 30 years ago --all because of Reagan-- Crazy. Absolutely bonkers.

From the the Census Bur.:

Table 104. Expectation of Life at Birth, 1970 to 2008, and Projections
1080......73.7
2010......78.3
​

So which is it, Reagan extended people's lives, or better maybe Reagan had nothing to do with all this stuff amounting to little more than a silly doom'n'gloom rant.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

"Great inequality is the scourge of modern societies".

so then eliminate the pure stupidity liberalism

1) with no fault divorce, feminism, abortion, and welfare liberals have destroyed the American family and created millions of single mothers living on the liberal dole and also millions of young men with no need to work!!


2) at the same time you have liberal unions shipping 30 million jobs off shore with their high prices

3) and at the same time you have huge liberal debt so the Chinese and others can buy that debt with their dollars rather than buy our products

4) oh and lets not forget that liberals let in 10 million illegals to take jobs that would have gone to Americans

 

[Rshermr]

"Great inequality is the scourge of modern societies".

so then eliminate the pure stupidity liberalism

1) with no fault divorce, feminism, abortion, and welfare liberals have destroyed the American family and created millions of single mothers living on the liberal dole and also millions of young men with no need to work!!


2) at the same time you have liberal unions shipping 30 million jobs off shore with their high prices

3) and at the same time you have huge liberal debt so the Chinese and others can buy that debt with their dollars rather than buy our products

4) oh and lets not forget that liberals let in 10 million illegals to take jobs that would have gone to Americans

Oh, ed. You must get yourself under control. I know you have been told to post this con dogma. I know you believe it is your job. And I know you have no idea of what it means to post proof of anything you have been told to post. Because, of course, you are delusional. We all understand it is not your fault. Just works out that way. You really need to read and understand these studies:


Stupid con studies:
Brock University Study Low IQ & Conservative Beliefs Linked to Prejudice | Racism, Bias & Politics | Right-Wing and Left-Wing Ideology | LiveScience

U of Arkansas study Study “Proves” Conservatism Linked To Stupidity - The Ulsterman Report

British Cohort study Right-wingers are less intelligent than left wingers, says controversial study - and conservative politics can lead people to be racist | Mail Online

LiveScience study Social conservatives have a lower I.Q.? (probably) | Gene Expression | Discover Magazine

Watching Fox makes you stupid Study: Watching Fox News Actually Makes You Stupid | Jillian Rayfield | Politics News | Rolling Stone

 

[BillSPrestonEsq]

If you look at the growth of size and scope of the government over the past century, you'll see what the problem is. If the size of government decreased over a period of time and things got increasingly worse as you say they have, you could blame the downsizing of the government right? Well why is it that when we have the opposite happen do many people still believe that an even larger more powerful government will SOLVE the problem? You look at Reagan and all his talk of smaller government. He is just like the republicans of today, they preach of smaller government but never make any significant changes. I understand why you would side with the democratic party. Democrats are dipicted by the media as more caring, compassionate, against war and for personal freedoms and equality. If you look more carefully at the outcome of many of these supposed attempts at equality, or at the regulation of business to improve quality or equality for labor you will see that these policies have an opposite effect. Small government and truly free markets (unlike those we have today) give to people their best chance at equality.

You'll see if you look at the history of government programs such as USDA for example and their farm loans program early in the agency's lifetime, or at their regulations, redtape and subsidies you will see the government is responsible for monopolies in food production. You will also see they have created a decline in afican american farmers. Also a reduction in quality of foods available, including locally grown organic produce and meats. You could look at the history of almost any industry and see how government regulations have created a void of competition in our markets, this includes labor markets. The inequality this creates leads to the rising cost of welfare, whether it be food stamps, public housing, telephones, etc.. and what good do these programs really do? How about the generations that grow up under the hand of the government that stop relying on themselves? It seems that we are on the road to socialism and we know that socialism has produced some of the worst living conditions in the past century. I agree we have a problem with inequality in this country and I know that government invervention is not the answer.

 

[Mr. H.]

I've lived through so many "have- have not" times in my life, I've lost count.
Lived below the poverty level with a child too. And this time next year who knows, I may be broke again. I could give a shit.

Yet I never felt "inequal". And it's never been a "scourge".

Difficult? Fuck yes. Insurmountable? Hell no.

Poverty doesn't frighten me. I grew up in it. Without free cell phones, EBT cards, or the plethora of social safety nets we have today.

Throughout the roller coaster ride of rags/riches/rags/riches there have been two constants:

"Do not flaunt what you have, and do not covet what others have".

In my opinion, it is the Liberal agenda that has created the stigma of economic inequality. I didn't say economic inequality itself... I'm talking about the stigma that is so associated.

For generations, my family has grappled with most of these so-called "11 health and social problems" physical health, mental health, drug abuse, education, imprisonment, obesity, social mobility, trust and community life, violence, teenage births, and child well-being.

Well, except obesity. Maybe it's the metabolism.

And through it all, we have been conservatives. Why? Because of the two constants.

I can not for the life of me understand why anyone with wealth and riches would flaunt, parade, wave, point, or belittle. Yet I see it all around me and it really makes me sick.

Conversely, I also don't understand why anyone afflicted with the "11" would consider themselves victims of scourge or inequal to anyone.

Deal with it. Regale in silence... suffer in silence. As I have.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

"Nearly 13 million American children live in families with incomes below the federal poverty level, which is $20,000 a year for a family of four. The number of children living in poverty increased by more than 11 percent between 2000 and 2005. There are 1.3 million more children living in poverty today than in 2000, despite indications of economic recovery and growth." NCCP | Who are America’s Poor Children?

Most conservative will argue, of course, that this is an ‘appropriate price’ to pay for our relative prosperity. Most conservatives also perceive the specter of poverty as an effective ‘incentive’ to compel citizens to be successful.

The Social Darwinism of the right is alive and well.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

"Nearly 13 million American children live in families with incomes below the federal poverty level, which is $20,000 a year for a family of four. The number of children living in poverty increased by more than 11 percent between 2000 and 2005. There are 1.3 million more children living in poverty today than in 2000, despite indications of economic recovery and growth." NCCP | Who are America’s Poor Children?

Most conservative will argue, of course, that this is an ‘appropriate price’ to pay for our relative prosperity. Most conservatives also perceive the specter of poverty as an effective ‘incentive’ to compel citizens to be successful.

The Social Darwinism of the right is alive and well.

Most Americans understand that those 13 million Americans are better off than hundreds of millions of people in China. The really smart ones know that you can't eliminate poverty through government decree.

Then we have Bono, who knows that everything he learned in school about how evil capitalism is a lie.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/parmyol...-realizations-about-aid-capitalism-and-nerds/

 

[Mr. H.]

And those who most often regale in their riches are, ironically, Liberals.

Yet they are often the first to champion forces in defense of the "scourged". The "inequals".

Further empowering those who truly need not power, but a right of identity.

Right of identity... acknowledgement, accordance, stature.

Don't dare recognise the victims of "11" for what they are, no... set them on a pedestal and make an example of them. Use them to your advantage... to promote social programs that aren't meant to lift them up but to keep them down.

THIS is the agenda of the Liberal.

My family never ever fell for this bullshit. We lifted ourselves up through hard suffering work. Through sacrifice. Hunger and hopelessness...

And in the end what paid off? Patience. Patience and belief in self... not government.

Romney professes belief in self. Obama professes belief in government.

You choose, sorry ass whores.

 

[Rshermr]

Wow. Great thread if you enjoy reading the opinions of idiots.

 

[percysunshine]

The Price Of Inequality = 99 cents.

 

[Mr. H.]

Wow. Great thread if you enjoy reading the opinions of idiots.

They call me MR IDIOT!

 

[Mr. H.]

... or Tibbs for short.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Oh, ed. You must get yourself under control.

a typical liberal using the personal attack strawman because he lacks the IQ and character for substance.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

I agree we have a problem with inequality in this country and I know that government invervention is not the answer.

government is the answer in the sense that they must correct the errors they have made to cause such inequality:

1) with no fault divorce, feminism, abortion, and welfare liberals have destroyed the American family and created millions of single mothers living on the liberal dole and also millions of young men with no need to work!!


2) at the same time you have liberal unions shipping 30 million jobs off shore with their high prices. We must make unions illegal again.

3) and at the same time you have huge liberal debt so the Chinese and others can buy that debt with their dollars rather than buy our products. We must make debt illegal!

4) oh and lets not forget that liberals let in 10 million illegals to take jobs that would have gone to Americans. We must control our borders again!

 

[midcan5]

'The Hideous Inequality Exposed by Hurricane Sandy'

"Divides between the rich and the poor are nothing new in New York, but the storm brought them vividly to the surface. There were residents like me who could invest all of their time and energy into protecting their families. And there were New Yorkers who could not....Those with a car could flee. Those with wealth could move into a hotel. Those with steady jobs could decline to come into work. But the city's cooks, doormen, maintenance men, taxi drivers and maids left their loved ones at home."

The Hideous Inequality Exposed by Hurricane Sandy - David Rohde - The Atlantic

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

'The Hideous Inequality Exposed by Hurricane Sandy'

yes yes there is inequality but why point it out at all unless you point out that liberals are the cause of it?? Do you want to point it out for the perverse fun of it or do you want to fix it??

 

[Rshermr]

'The Hideous Inequality Exposed by Hurricane Sandy'

yes yes there is inequality but why point it out at all unless you point out that liberals are the cause of it?? Do you want to point it out for the perverse fun of it or do you want to fix it??

ed, ed, ed. Stop before you convince everyone that you are a congenital idiot. Just posting con dogma does not indicate intelligent life. Just proves that there are congenital idiots around, and that you are one. We KNOW that cons only believe what they are told. We know cons do not worry about the poor. So, why open your mouth, my poor congenital idiot. Just proves the point.