The risk of income inequality

[eflatminor]

When income inequalities persist, violence ensues.

And when it doesn't, peace reigns. Why just look at how wonderful life is in those countries with no income inequality...

 

[RandallFlagg]

Another delusional soul that thinks wealth is a finite pile of cash from which we all must draw.

You want to talk about actual impediments to upward economic mobility that may prevent a person from "self-insuring themselves against these risks"? Fine, but to blame people that have succeeded in life and self insured themselves against the unforeseen is just asinine. It's akin to suggesting that if a man is hungry, it's because his food was necessarily eaten by a fat man. It's ridiculous.

There may be reasons that we could agree upon that poor people are not achieving that which you suggest is important to obtain, but "wealth inequality" hasn't a damn thing to do with it. To suggest so is only exposing your own jealousy of those that achieved in life that which has alluded you.

If you want to focus on impediments to the poor becoming middle class and the middle class becoming rich, we can talk...but they have to be REAL impediments, not just a thinly veiled and poorly constructed case for even more wealth redistribution.

But that seems to be the salient point here. This "Robin Hood" mentality that exists among those on the left who would rather "take" from someone who has busted his rear end most of his life (although they will tell you that said individual stole it on the backs of the "workers") rather than do something about their own miserable situation lends itself to Marx and Stalin.

To hell with realizing the fruits of your own labor. I WANT IT HANDED TO ME!!! Sounds like spoiled children to me.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

1) Americans in the 80's-2000's, until 2008 treated debt as income. Americans not only did not save any money for retirement, they spent more than they made...for years. Whose fault is this??
2) Americans systematically, across all income levels, purchased homes waaaay above their income levels. So much so, that the phrase "mortgage poor" became a household word. Because their payments were so outrageously high to their income, no one saved any money for retirement. Whose fault is that?
3) Americans do not give a rats ass, despite everyone claiming otherwise, where the products they buy are made. Americans have loss all sense of the work value. Americans will pick the product with the lowest cost over and over and over. Even if it is a brand they never heard of. This purchasing habit had an enormous influence on companies outsourcing manufacturing to get to the lowest possible price that Americans demand. Whose fault is that?
4) Corporatism. Corporations have taken over virtually every industry/service in America. Companies have merged and merged and merged again. With every merge, more and more people lose their jobs. Corporations have become so powerful, with political influence so great - that they have transformed America from a Democratic Republic governance to an Oligarchical system where commerce regulations and laws heavily-heavily benefit corporations over the citizens. But because we are such a divided nation, with each side so convinced everything bad is because of the other guy - never our side - always the other - the same corrupt officials are voted in over and over protecting the oligarchy. Whose fault is this?

 

[RandallFlagg]

the gap in income inequality has grown larger FASTER under obama and Progressive government than it did under Bush and Republicans


libs are losers who lie to themselves; fail and make excuses blaming others

Indeed. Trillions of cash being held in overseas banks and markets just waiting for this "hope and change" to go away. And I don't blame them. Right now, this very day, there is absolutely no reason whatsoever to invest in this country. This president will snatch it away faster than you can say "Scrooge McDuck"

 

[Redfish]

the gap in income inequality has grown larger FASTER under obama and Progressive government than it did under Bush and Republicans


libs are losers who lie to themselves; fail and make excuses blaming others

the dumb ass liberals who preach this crap don't have any idea what they are wishing for. They want a system where the govt doles out income "equally" to all citizens regardless of skills, education, or contribution to society.

what these idiots don't understand that under that kind of system ALL OF THE MONEY AND ALL OF THE POWER IS CONCENTRATED IN A VERY SMALL GROUP OF SUPER ELITES AND EVERYONE ELSE IS EQUALLY MISERABLE..

 

[eflatminor]

When income inequalities persist, violence ensues.

THE gap in income is growing larger FASTER under Progressives


go figure

Indeed. In fact, after 100 years of Progressive rule, the wealth and income gap is higher than during the so called 'Robber Barron' days, which, ironically, was one of the things that launched the Progressive era! Once again proving the Progressive tendency to make the very "problems" they claim to stand against worse.

 

[Seawytch]

It would not, if the effort expanded on violence were channeled into improving oneself and/or finding a better job.

Violence is the last resort of the malcontent and incompetent.

It's amazing you think the income inequality is a result of people not working hard enough. It's like ya'll don't ******* pay attention AT ALL.

just think wytchey, if you were straight you might have married a rich guy and be living in luxury rather than in a lesbian hovel and worrrying where you next meal will come from

Fish, you've reached ludicrous speed. You are fixated and it's getting scary.

I happen to be the sole "breadwinner" of our family and I made over $75k last year. I don't need a man to "take care of me" you misogynist ****.

 

[eflatminor]

There was a time in this country where you graduated school, learned a trade and got a job with a major corporation and you were set for life
If you were lucky, you got a union job with good benefits. You could work 40 years with the same company and when you retired you had a good pension with health benefits.

Now workers are on edge. They don't know if they will have a job in six months. They accept jobs rather than careers. No benefits, no security, no future. Don't like it....there is the door. Collective bargaining is a thing of the past. You are on your own

One false step and you are destitute

Still has nothing to do with wealth inequality.

 

[Redfish]

It's amazing you think the income inequality is a result of people not working hard enough. It's like ya'll don't ******* pay attention AT ALL.

just think wytchey, if you were straight you might have married a rich guy and be living in luxury rather than in a lesbian hovel and worrrying where you next meal will come from

Fish, you've reached ludicrous speed. You are fixated and it's getting scary.

I happen to be the sole "breadwinner" of our family and I made over $75k last year. I don't need a man to "take care of me" you misogynist ****.

Grow up, wytch. I was joking with you. Did you miss the big smile at the end of my post?

Your sensitivity to the truth makes me wonder about you.

 

[DriftingSand]

The big myth about income inequality that just won't die - The Week

Modern life is fraught with very expensive risks lurking around every corner. A sudden illness or accident could render you disabled and unable to work. A recession or economic restructuring could render you unemployed and render the skills you've spent your life learning useless. Reaching old age with inadequate savings could mean living your golden years in poverty.

Many societies have created robust social insurance systems to protect their populations from these kinds of risks. The U.S. has done so as well, but to a much lesser extent. Because social insurance in the U.S. is so inadequate, it is incumbent upon people to self-insure against these risks. That means they need to have enough wealth to draw upon as a cushion if they end up facing hard times. But here's where the social contract fails: When the bottom half of the country owns basically none of the country's wealth, they can't self-insure themselves against these risks. Instead, they must lead a relatively perilous life in which one misstep or mistake could wreck them and their families.

Sounds like you're bucking for a raise -- in your welfare benefits?

If a person works hard, saves his money, plans for the future, and creates his own "insurance" then he won't have to rely on government handouts when he's fired from his job for showing up high on pot.

Money doesn't grow on trees (unless you're living in a Progressive fantasy-land where the streets are made of licorice and money machines exist on every street corner). In the real world good jobs must be available before people can work. So ... in your scenario, there would be a handful of folks working and two handfuls NOT working. The workers would perpetually support the non-workers. That wouldn't be "fair" (a Progressive coin word) to the workers.

 

[FJO]

When income inequalities persist, violence ensues.

It would not, if the effort expanded on violence were channeled into improving oneself and/or finding a better job.

Violence is the last resort of the malcontent and incompetent.

It's amazing you think the income inequality is a result of people not working hard enough. It's like ya'll don't ******* pay attention AT ALL.

I always paid attention to my own income.

As a self-taught computer programmer with only a high school degree, my salary was quite a bit lower than that of my colleagues with college degrees, but with a little common sense I realized that if I bitched about "inequality" I would just look foolish.

However, I used to have immense satisfaction when my colleagues routinely came to me not only for programming advise, but also to proof read their reports. I guess they did not care that English was my second language.

BTW, before I taught myself computer programming I worked in the bush as a lumberjack, underground in mines, on the factory floor of the company where I worked for almost 40 years, of which I HAD TO BE a union member for the first four months. It was a red letter holiday for me when I finally got out of the union and got a menial office job which led to becoming a programmer.

So, yes, I worked hard all my life, but I never debased myself by envying others.

 

[rightwinger]

So what do we do?

Conservatives run around screaming "Class envy" "they want to take from the rich and give to the poor".

We need to look at our existing and future policies and ask "Who benefits the most from this policy?". In the overwhelming majority of the cases, it will be the wealthy

Why do we continue policies to help the wealthy accumulate and protect wealth when they obviously don't need it?

Don't give cash to the poor and working class, but invest in programs that reduce their social risk. Low cost healthcare, low cost education programs, home ownership initiatives, low taxes. Shift the burden of caring for workers back to the employers. They should provide for their workers....not the taxpayer

 

[rightwinger]

The big myth about income inequality that just won't die - The Week

Modern life is fraught with very expensive risks lurking around every corner. A sudden illness or accident could render you disabled and unable to work. A recession or economic restructuring could render you unemployed and render the skills you've spent your life learning useless. Reaching old age with inadequate savings could mean living your golden years in poverty.

Many societies have created robust social insurance systems to protect their populations from these kinds of risks. The U.S. has done so as well, but to a much lesser extent. Because social insurance in the U.S. is so inadequate, it is incumbent upon people to self-insure against these risks. That means they need to have enough wealth to draw upon as a cushion if they end up facing hard times. But here's where the social contract fails: When the bottom half of the country owns basically none of the country's wealth, they can't self-insure themselves against these risks. Instead, they must lead a relatively perilous life in which one misstep or mistake could wreck them and their families.

Sounds like you're bucking for a raise -- in your welfare benefits?

If a person works hard, saves his money, plans for the future, and creates his own "insurance" then he won't have to rely on government handouts when he's fired from his job for showing up high on pot.

Money doesn't grow on trees (unless you're living in a Progressive fantasy-land where the streets are made of licorice and money machines exist on every street corner). In the real world good jobs must be available before people can work. So ... in your scenario, there would be a handful of folks working and two handfuls NOT working. The workers would perpetually support the non-workers. That wouldn't be "fair" (a Progressive coin word) to the workers.

Yes....I have heard about that

We used to call it the American Dream

 

[eflatminor]

So what do we do?

First thing is to stop suggesting your problems are due to someone else's success.

Conservatives run around screaming "Class envy" "they want to take from the rich and give to the poor".

We need to look at our existing and future policies and ask "Who benefits the most from this policy?". In the overwhelming majority of the cases, it will be the wealthy

Great. Let's focus on EQUAL justice, not SOCIAL justice. That way, government policies won't benefit any particular class or subset of the people.

Deal?

Why do we continue policies to help the wealthy accumulate and protect wealth when they obviously don't need it?

Of course, we have PLENTY of policies to help the poor. They're called entitlements.

So you agree we should stop with policies that attempt to help some but not others? Or are you suggesting only YOU should get handouts?

Don't give cash to the poor and working class,

Don't give someone else's cash to anyone. How about that?

but invest in programs that reduce their social risk. Low cost healthcare, low cost education programs, home ownership initiatives, low taxes. Shift the burden of caring for workers back to the employers. They should provide for their workers....not the taxpayer

Marxist nonsense.

 

[Redfish]

So what do we do?

Conservatives run around screaming "Class envy" "they want to take from the rich and give to the poor".

We need to look at our existing and future policies and ask "Who benefits the most from this policy?". In the overwhelming majority of the cases, it will be the wealthy

Why do we continue policies to help the wealthy accumulate and protect wealth when they obviously don't need it?

Don't give cash to the poor and working class, but invest in programs that reduce their social risk. Low cost healthcare, low cost education programs, home ownership initiatives, low taxes. Shift the burden of caring for workers back to the employers. They should provide for their workers....not the taxpayer

What should we do? is that your question? Get the government out of our private lives, our jobs, our homes, our finances, our religion, our health, our education. Let the federal govt limit itself to its constitutional duties---defense of the nation, a court system, and interstate commerce.

Let everything else be set by the free market and the laws of supply and demand.

Let people succeed or fail by their own efforts.

Let voluntary charity and churches help those who cannot help themselves.

Return this country to real freedom.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

We never intended Social Security to be your total retirement system. It was expected that workers would own homes and have a financial nest egg to ensure they could retire comfortably
Then we allowed ourselves to destroy that nestegg. Leave a worker barely enough to live on and forget about saving for the future. Go into debt if you want your children to be educated. God forbid you get seriously ill and your life savings are gone. This is the society we have created and it is an embarrassment for a great nation

The road to hell is always paved in the best intentions. You turds will never ever understand the unseen consequences of your actions. You only see what you hope will be accomplished. Even when it's not accomplished you complain that people did it wrong.

Loser.

 

[Brain357]

There was a time in this country where you graduated school, learned a trade and got a job with a major corporation and you were set for life
If you were lucky, you got a union job with good benefits. You could work 40 years with the same company and when you retired you had a good pension with health benefits.

Now workers are on edge. They don't know if they will have a job in six months. They accept jobs rather than careers. No benefits, no security, no future. Don't like it....there is the door. Collective bargaining is a thing of the past. You are on your own

One false step and you are destitute

That was back when CEOs made 20x the average worker. Now they make over 270x the average worker to do the same job. Now they ship jobs over seas and cut benefits, sticking the government with the bill.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

There was a time in this country where you graduated school, learned a trade and got a job with a major corporation and you were set for life
If you were lucky, you got a union job with good benefits. You could work 40 years with the same company and when you retired you had a good pension with health benefits.

Now workers are on edge. They don't know if they will have a job in six months. They accept jobs rather than careers. No benefits, no security, no future. Don't like it....there is the door. Collective bargaining is a thing of the past. You are on your own

One false step and you are destitute

That was back when CEOs made 20x the average worker. Now they make over 270x the average worker to do the same job. Now they ship jobs over seas and cut benefits, sticking the government with the bill.

it's that sucking vacuum sound. NAFTA is the reason for the job shipments out of the country. The government created that climate, not business. Thank Clinton and those who were a proponent of the so called "free trade" agreements.

 

[rightwinger]

There was a time in this country where you graduated school, learned a trade and got a job with a major corporation and you were set for life
If you were lucky, you got a union job with good benefits. You could work 40 years with the same company and when you retired you had a good pension with health benefits.

Now workers are on edge. They don't know if they will have a job in six months. They accept jobs rather than careers. No benefits, no security, no future. Don't like it....there is the door. Collective bargaining is a thing of the past. You are on your own

One false step and you are destitute

That was back when CEOs made 20x the average worker. Now they make over 270x the average worker to do the same job. Now they ship jobs over seas and cut benefits, sticking the government with the bill.

Since the Reagan Revolution, our society has valued the role of Capitalists over the role of labor

Remove government oversight, lower tax burdens while you ensure a low cost workforce is available and collective bargaining is eliminated.

 

[Freewill]

We never intended Social Security to be your total retirement system. It was expected that workers would own homes and have a financial nest egg to ensure they could retire comfortably
Then we allowed ourselves to destroy that nestegg. Leave a worker barely enough to live on and forget about saving for the future. Go into debt if you want your children to be educated. God forbid you get seriously ill and your life savings are gone. This is the society we have created and it is an embarrassment for a great nation

How exactly did "we" do that? There is lots of opportunity in America which will be only growing as the boomers retire. The way it might have happened is that government takes so much of a person's wealth. 20 percent to a one percenter is nothing, 20 percent to a low income person is a lot.