The risk of income inequality

[MikeK]

When income inequalities persist, violence ensues.

How much do the following give towards reducing income inequality? Pelosi, Reid, Streisand, Sarandon, Penn, O'Donnell, Schumer, Rahm, Rangel, Sharpton, Jackson, Baldwin.

Rich liberals are the biggest hypocrites of all, they preach all the income inequality bullshit while sitting in their million dollar mansions eating cavier.

The answer to your question rests on a critically important fact which your position fails to consider, that being those whom you have listed here are simply millionaires, ordinary everyday millionaires, which have always existed in America, but no real attention has ever been focused on their category. The reason being these ordinary millionaires, who are expected to exist in a wealthy and resourceful place like America, are not the reason for or the cause of the existing inequity in distribution of our Nation's wealth.

Those of us who are protesting against the existing economic inequity have no beef with you. So stop flattering yourself with defensive nonsense. You are entitled to have what you've worked for. Bur you're not entitled to piss on everyone who for reasons beyond their control have been impeded from achieving even minimal financial success. The simple fact is our Country's economic system has been sabotaged by an insidious progression of de-regulations which have enabled the rise of a veritable financial aristocracy in which a tiny percentage of the population, the One Percenters, have managed to acquire and to hoard more of America's wealth than the remaining percentage -- those who actually do the work that produces the wealth. These One Percenters are not ordinary millionaires and low-level financial successes like you, they are multi-billionaires who have, by one devious scheme or political maneuver or other, greedily accumulated more money than they could spend even if they tried to.

It is the criminal bankers, the criminals on Wall Street, and the criminally corrupt politicians whom the protest is directed at. Not small-fry like you.

So get over it.

 

[dblack]

So if I understand you two correctly, you're advocating an increase to the defense budget as a solution to Obama's failed jobs initiatives?

Interesting

-Geaux

No, we are demonstrating to you that the Government does create jobs......millions of them

Then why don't they create millions more?

Problem solved

-Geaux

Screw that. Why don't they just send us all checks for a million our so? Then we'll all be rich, right?

 

[KNB]

Listen to yourselves, Republicans. Rich assholes own your government. ALL of the government shit that you bitch about is put into play by private interests. We the People, left, right and center, are not in control of our government.

Rich fucks hire lobbyists to write the laws that benefit rich people. This has led to the richest people making the majority of the financial gains while the rest of society struggles, poor working Republicans included.

Why are Republicans so quick to believe the lie that the rich are looking out for your best interests? You are cheap labor to them and nothing more. Your votes are meaningless when all you get are candidates who campaign in gerrymandered districts on anonymous corporate dollars. This is not Democracy. It isn't even a Constitutional Republic. It's a Fascist merger of state and corporate power, and you are DEFENDING it.

Does anyone really want to argue this point? Rich pieces of shit have made so much money that they can't be put in jail even when they confess to FUNDING TERRORISM AGAINST AMERICA.
BBC News - HSBC to pay $1.9bn in US money laundering penalties

They don't care about you or the US Constitution. Why do you defend the rich? They've committed treason against you, your country and your Constitution. Why do you defend their greed?

 

[dblack]

Listen to yourselves, Republicans. Rich assholes own your government. ALL of the government shit that you bitch about is put into play by private interests. We the People, left, right and center, are not in control of our government.

Rich fucks hire lobbyists to write the laws that benefit rich people. This has led to the richest people making the majority of the financial gains while the rest of society struggles, poor working Republicans included.

How can you hold this opinion, yet advocate for policies that give government ever more control over your economic decisions? Don't you see the contradiction in that?

 

[percysunshine]

Listen to yourselves, Republicans. Rich assholes own your government. ..... Why do you defend their greed?

Earth to KNB. Most of the rich are liberal Democrats.

Just thought you might want to know.

.

 

[Brain357]

Cut off the freebie welfare and your $904,00 is turned into zero.
Sometimes the simplest answers are the best solution.

Sounds like a great plan to bring out the liberal vote. Then here come the higher taxes.

Sad that the majority can vote a tax increase for the minority.
I think our founding fathers were against majority rule.

"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote." Benjamin Franklin

"When the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic." ~ Benjamin Franklin

Well I didn't say I like it, but that's going to be the reality. The right refuses to do anything other than cut welfare. That's not going to work. You need a better plan than that if we are really going to fix the problem.

 

[rightwinger]

Because it's none of your business how much they make is why. Worry about your own position and sack up accept your reality.

Believe it or not- you control it

-Geaux

Yes, it is my business when my government continues policies that help only the wealthy and do not deliver the jobs and prosperity to working Americans that was promised

If you think it is the government's responsibility to provide jobs for people, then the battle has already been lost.
Last I looked there was nothing in the Constitution about the government providing jobs to anybody.

Where did I say anything about the government providing jobs for people?

 

[GWV5903]

Listen to yourselves, Republicans. Rich assholes own your government. ALL of the government shit that you bitch about is put into play by private interests. We the People, left, right and center, are not in control of our government.

Rich fucks hire lobbyists to write the laws that benefit rich people. This has led to the richest people making the majority of the financial gains while the rest of society struggles, poor working Republicans included.

Why are Republicans so quick to believe the lie that the rich are looking out for your best interests? You are cheap labor to them and nothing more. Your votes are meaningless when all you get are candidates who campaign in gerrymandered districts on anonymous corporate dollars. This is not Democracy. It isn't even a Constitutional Republic. It's a Fascist merger of state and corporate power, and you are DEFENDING it.

Does anyone really want to argue this point? Rich pieces of shit have made so much money that they can't be put in jail even when they confess to FUNDING TERRORISM AGAINST AMERICA.
BBC News - HSBC to pay $1.9bn in US money laundering penalties

They don't care about you or the US Constitution. Why do you defend the rich? They've committed treason against you, your country and your Constitution. Why do you defend their greed?

Yeah they clearly found Republicans at fault for this...

 

[The T]

Listen to yourselves, Republicans. Rich assholes own your government. ALL of the government shit that you bitch about is put into play by private interests. We the People, left, right and center, are not in control of our government.

Rich fucks hire lobbyists to write the laws that benefit rich people. This has led to the richest people making the majority of the financial gains while the rest of society struggles, poor working Republicans included.

Why are Republicans so quick to believe the lie that the rich are looking out for your best interests? You are cheap labor to them and nothing more. Your votes are meaningless when all you get are candidates who campaign in gerrymandered districts on anonymous corporate dollars. This is not Democracy. It isn't even a Constitutional Republic. It's a Fascist merger of state and corporate power, and you are DEFENDING it.

Does anyone really want to argue this point? Rich pieces of shit have made so much money that they can't be put in jail even when they confess to FUNDING TERRORISM AGAINST AMERICA.
BBC News - HSBC to pay $1.9bn in US money laundering penalties

They don't care about you or the US Constitution. Why do you defend the rich? They've committed treason against you, your country and your Constitution. Why do you defend their greed?

AND the very SAME *YOU* continue to vote for.

DUMBASS.

 

[zeke]

You know what's funny? Every single time there is serious discussion in Congress about reducing military spending, whether it be by closing a military base, re aligning a military base or shutting down the procurement process for planes or ships or tanks that we don't need, there is always a Congresscritter that comes forth and complains bitterly about taking away the single biggest contribution that the Congresscritter can make to the community that elected him; JOBS. FUCKING JOBS CREATED BY THE GOVERNMENT.

Congresscritters fight tooth and nail for those jobs. You know, the jobs the government doesn't create.
Except when they do. Why you think those Congress people fight so hard for those jobs?

 

[Erand7899]

Listen to yourselves, Republicans. Rich assholes own your government. ALL of the government shit that you bitch about is put into play by private interests. We the People, left, right and center, are not in control of our government.

Rich fucks hire lobbyists to write the laws that benefit rich people. This has led to the richest people making the majority of the financial gains while the rest of society struggles, poor working Republicans included.

Why are Republicans so quick to believe the lie that the rich are looking out for your best interests? You are cheap labor to them and nothing more. Your votes are meaningless when all you get are candidates who campaign in gerrymandered districts on anonymous corporate dollars. This is not Democracy. It isn't even a Constitutional Republic. It's a Fascist merger of state and corporate power, and you are DEFENDING it.

Does anyone really want to argue this point? Rich pieces of shit have made so much money that they can't be put in jail even when they confess to FUNDING TERRORISM AGAINST AMERICA.
BBC News - HSBC to pay $1.9bn in US money laundering penalties

They don't care about you or the US Constitution. Why do you defend the rich? They've committed treason against you, your country and your Constitution. Why do you defend their greed?

First off, you cannot put a bank in jail, and you can only put the employees of the bank in jail, if you can prove that they, personally, committed a crime. Banks are very good at difussing such activity through many people, most of whom do not even know they are doing something improper. The people who do know, rarely leave any trails leading back to them.

Second, you are stating a valid problem about the ultra-wealthy and government. However, you do not have a clue as to the root problem. The ultra-wealthy are not the root problem, you and people like you are. When government is powerful enough to give you what you want, it is powerful enough to take anything and everything away from you.

Political power can be, and usually is, bought and sold. The more power that a politician has, the more he/she has to sell, and the more the ultra-wealthy can buy. We cannot, as a people, have much control over the buying and selling, but we can control the amount of power that any individual politician has to sell. And, we can specifically limit political power in the areas that ultra-wealthy individuals and corporations desire to gain from.

Corporations and the ultra-wealthy want tax breaks and are willing to pay for them. We can severely reduce that market by tax reform that precludes any tax breaks for any one.

Corporations want politicians to stack the deck by limiting competition. We can severely reduce that market by bringing the regulatory agencies under control, and removing much of their authority to regulate.

However, we can do little of this as long as we have a sizable segment of the voting public who demand that government have the power to give them what they want.

 

[MikeK]

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

Which hasn't a damn thing to do with the existence of wealthy people.

I've noticed your avatar implies admiration for Milton Friedman, who inspired Ronald Reagan's implementation of "supply side" Reaganomics -- which commenced the gradual descent of our national economy into virtual catastrophe. I wonder if you know that prior to Friedman stepping in to advise Reagan he had been advisor to Augusto Pinochet who subsequently ruined Chile's economy which had been perfectly stable under Allende.

 

[Andylusion]

Ok cut welfare but do nothing to create more jobs. In 2 years a bunch of liberals get elected and welfare is back. You've solved nothing.

Or change the corporate tax code giving incentives for companies to employ here in the US, pay good wages, give good benefits, and offer good retirement. If a company does those things then make it 0. In the example of Walmart I believe that would open up billions for workers.

In 1990s, we cut welfare and did nothing to create more jobs.

As for electing a bunch of liberals and getting welfare back, that will happen even under your plan. You solved nothing.

There will never be a point at which people earn so much they don't want welfare. When I worked at Wendy's, a lady there told us straight up that she intended to only work long enough to qualify for welfare again. She quit on the day she qualified.

Nothing you do is going to fix that, except simply ending welfare.

Even at the job I'm at right now, there was a lady there who walked around asking if anyone wanted to buy her EBT card. She was working there earning the same amount I was, yet collecting food assistance. And obviously she wasn't really tight on food, because she was willing to sell a $150 card for $50.

Nothing you do is going to fix that, except simply ending EBT.

And again, there is no amount of tax incentive you can provide that is going to make employees earn enough to get off welfare. It simply isn't going to happen.

Well we have to disagree then. Like I already told you in the 90's we had a strong economy and low unemployment. CEO's also weren't making 300x the average worker. If this was the 90's I'd be with you, but it's not.

Now we have the rich making insane amounts of money while they pay workers so little they are collecting welfare. Just can't do it now.

Several left leaning people on here have been on board with my idea. It should be a win for everyone. Give corporations lower taxes. People get better wages and benefits. More people get off welfare and we get a balanced budget.

One other thing that I think we need to do that liberals will probably disagree with me on is close the border. A constant stream of low paid workers is driving down pay for everyone.

Um... based on what? We had 2% growth rate for most of the early 90s, and after the cuts in welfare, the growth rate ticked up.

Further, unemployment in 1994, before the cuts was 6%, and after the cuts, when people were kicked off the welfare rolls, unemployment dropped down to the 4.5% range.

We are effectively in the exact same position we were before 1995 when they pushed welfare reform. GDP growth rate is about the same. Unemployment is about the same.

Now the CEO pay is relatively true... but again, complete irrelevant. It doesn't change anything.

Again, if I open a store, and hire people, and come up with the financials, so that the store makes a $3,000 profit, and the workers are paid $10/hour..... when I open a second store, my increase in wage, doesn't change how much the store can economically pay workers.

If I open 1,000 stores, I'll be making $3 Million a year. But each individual store, still can't pay the employees anything more.

The only way to increase the wages of the workers, is if the customers are willing to pay more for the goods. If they are not, it doesn't matter what my wage is, the workers still can't get paid more.

Like I said, the entire executive pay of Walmart (according to you), is $65 Million. That translates into 1¢ an hour for employees. The executive pay isn't the problem.

 

[Andylusion]

Won't work. Cut welfare while everyone sees the rich getting richer? That will bring out the liberal vote. We are much more likely to get increased taxes. Not what I want, but far more likely to happen.

The rich got richer in the 1990s too. Cutting welfare worked then, and it will work today.

Then there were lots of jobs. Cut welfare and people could go out and get a job. Cut it now and there still aren't any jobs. And many of the ones out there are paying so poorly that people collect welfare even with a job. You cut welfare and next election it will be back up with nice tax increases for the rich or probably all of us.

Back in 1995, when they were cutting welfare, they were saying how there were no jobs, and how people would die in the street, and end up homeless, and kids would starve.

Now suddenly in retrospect, there were plenty of jobs? No, the same excuses you are using now, were the ones they were saying back then. They were wrong then. You are now.

 

[Andylusion]

I OPPOSE income equality. All rational people do -- or should.

Who ever asked for equality?

But when the highest earners make 200 times what the average earner makes it is time to ask...why do we continue policies that help the highest earners?

The primary policy that help the highest earners is called "freedom". It's the same freedom that allows the poorest earners, to whittle duck callers on their back porch, and end up with a TV show on A&E.

We continue the policies that help the highest earners, because it's also the best policy to help the lowest earners.

 

[MikeK]

Listen to yourselves, Republicans. Rich assholes own your government. ALL of the government shit that you bitch about is put into play by private interests. We the People, left, right and center, are not in control of our government.

Rich fucks hire lobbyists to write the laws that benefit rich people. This has led to the richest people making the majority of the financial gains while the rest of society struggles, poor working Republicans included.

Why are Republicans so quick to believe the lie that the rich are looking out for your best interests? You are cheap labor to them and nothing more. Your votes are meaningless when all you get are candidates who campaign in gerrymandered districts on anonymous corporate dollars. This is not Democracy. It isn't even a Constitutional Republic. It's a Fascist merger of state and corporate power, and you are DEFENDING it.

Does anyone really want to argue this point? Rich pieces of shit have made so much money that they can't be put in jail even when they confess to FUNDING TERRORISM AGAINST AMERICA.
BBC News - HSBC to pay $1.9bn in US money laundering penalties

They don't care about you or the US Constitution. Why do you defend the rich? They've committed treason against you, your country and your Constitution. Why do you defend their greed?

First off, you cannot put a bank in jail, and you can only put the employees of the bank in jail, if you can prove that they, personally, committed a crime. Banks are very good at difussing such activity through many people, most of whom do not even know they are doing something improper. The people who do know, rarely leave any trails leading back to them.

Second, you are stating a valid problem about the ultra-wealthy and government. However, you do not have a clue as to the root problem. The ultra-wealthy are not the root problem, you and people like you are. When government is powerful enough to give you what you want, it is powerful enough to take anything and everything away from you.

Political power can be, and usually is, bought and sold. The more power that a politician has, the more he/she has to sell, and the more the ultra-wealthy can buy. We cannot, as a people, have much control over the buying and selling, but we can control the amount of power that any individual politician has to sell. And, we can specifically limit political power in the areas that ultra-wealthy individuals and corporations desire to gain from.

Corporations and the ultra-wealthy want tax breaks and are willing to pay for them. We can severely reduce that market by tax reform that precludes any tax breaks for any one.

Corporations want politicians to stack the deck by limiting competition. We can severely reduce that market by bringing the regulatory agencies under control, and removing much of their authority to regulate.

However, we can do little of this as long as we have a sizable segment of the voting public who demand that government have the power to give them what they want.

Such as? Specifics please.

 

[Brain357]

In 1990s, we cut welfare and did nothing to create more jobs.

As for electing a bunch of liberals and getting welfare back, that will happen even under your plan. You solved nothing.

There will never be a point at which people earn so much they don't want welfare. When I worked at Wendy's, a lady there told us straight up that she intended to only work long enough to qualify for welfare again. She quit on the day she qualified.

Nothing you do is going to fix that, except simply ending welfare.

Even at the job I'm at right now, there was a lady there who walked around asking if anyone wanted to buy her EBT card. She was working there earning the same amount I was, yet collecting food assistance. And obviously she wasn't really tight on food, because she was willing to sell a $150 card for $50.

Nothing you do is going to fix that, except simply ending EBT.

And again, there is no amount of tax incentive you can provide that is going to make employees earn enough to get off welfare. It simply isn't going to happen.

Well we have to disagree then. Like I already told you in the 90's we had a strong economy and low unemployment. CEO's also weren't making 300x the average worker. If this was the 90's I'd be with you, but it's not.

Now we have the rich making insane amounts of money while they pay workers so little they are collecting welfare. Just can't do it now.

Several left leaning people on here have been on board with my idea. It should be a win for everyone. Give corporations lower taxes. People get better wages and benefits. More people get off welfare and we get a balanced budget.

One other thing that I think we need to do that liberals will probably disagree with me on is close the border. A constant stream of low paid workers is driving down pay for everyone.

Um... based on what? We had 2% growth rate for most of the early 90s, and after the cuts in welfare, the growth rate ticked up.

Further, unemployment in 1994, before the cuts was 6%, and after the cuts, when people were kicked off the welfare rolls, unemployment dropped down to the 4.5% range.

We are effectively in the exact same position we were before 1995 when they pushed welfare reform. GDP growth rate is about the same. Unemployment is about the same.

Now the CEO pay is relatively true... but again, complete irrelevant. It doesn't change anything.

Again, if I open a store, and hire people, and come up with the financials, so that the store makes a $3,000 profit, and the workers are paid $10/hour..... when I open a second store, my increase in wage, doesn't change how much the store can economically pay workers.

If I open 1,000 stores, I'll be making $3 Million a year. But each individual store, still can't pay the employees anything more.

The only way to increase the wages of the workers, is if the customers are willing to pay more for the goods. If they are not, it doesn't matter what my wage is, the workers still can't get paid more.

Like I said, the entire executive pay of Walmart (according to you), is $65 Million. That translates into 1¢ an hour for employees. The executive pay isn't the problem.

Wasn't welfare reform in 1996 when the unemployment rate was about 5.6%? Aren't we about 6.7% now? You counting on a .com boom too? Sorry but cutting welfare when there are no jobs will bring out the liberal vote. Then welfare will be back and taxes raised.

I see you leave out the $3 billion the Waltons make every year. Yeah no way Walmart can afford to pay more.

 

[Brain357]

The rich got richer in the 1990s too. Cutting welfare worked then, and it will work today.

Then there were lots of jobs. Cut welfare and people could go out and get a job. Cut it now and there still aren't any jobs. And many of the ones out there are paying so poorly that people collect welfare even with a job. You cut welfare and next election it will be back up with nice tax increases for the rich or probably all of us.

Back in 1995, when they were cutting welfare, they were saying how there were no jobs, and how people would die in the street, and end up homeless, and kids would starve.

Now suddenly in retrospect, there were plenty of jobs? No, the same excuses you are using now, were the ones they were saying back then. They were wrong then. You are now.

Sorry but I was around and working back then. The environment can't even be compared, was a much better time.

 

[Andylusion]

I favor rising tides.

It used to be a rising tide lifts all boats

Now, a rising tide only lifts the yachts

Roughly 20,000 people work in the yacht building industry.
The Average Yearly Income for Boat Builders | Everyday Life - Global Post

A yacht engineer has a starting wage of $70,000.
A yacht engineer technician has a starting wage of $53,000.
A yacht mechanical drafter has a starting wage of $55,000.
A yacht electrical drafter has a starting wage of $73,000.
A yacht engineer has a starting wage of $70,000.

A yacht production, and construction employee has an average wage of $41,000 to $49,000 a year.

All of those jobs, are only in the building side. Not including sales and management jobs associated with that.

Additionally, you then have to staff a yacht.

Crewfinders Yacht Crew Starting Salaries

A ship first officer, trained chef, and captain, can make $100K a year.
An Engineer or cook, can easily make $80K.
All of positions can earn a minimum of $30K to $70K, depending on experience and ship size.

That's thousands on thousands of jobs, that all are very decent paying

Several of those top 10 yacht firms, have announced plans to double their work force.

So apparently the rising tide is in fact lifting the boats of these people. Or would you rather they stay at Wendy's? Of course not.

 

[Andylusion]

Who ever asked for equality?

But when the highest earners make 200 times what the average earner makes it is time to ask...why do we continue policies that help the highest earners?

Because it's none of your business how much they make is why. Worry about your own position and sack up accept your reality.

Believe it or not- you control it

-Geaux

Yes, it is my business when my government continues policies that help only the wealthy and do not deliver the jobs and prosperity to working Americans that was promised

Well first off..... nothing personal..... but if anyone thinks that government even has the ability.... to "deliver jobs and prosperity", then they are idiots.

Government does not have any ability whatsoever to "deliver" jobs and prosperity to you.

Now they most certainly promise that. Especially democrats. Real quick to claim that "the stimulus package will save jobs and make the economy prosper".

But if you believe these people, then you really need to have your head examined. And do *not* blame ANYONE for you being dumb or foolish enough to believe a politicians when he says he's going to deliver jobs and prosperity.

The only one who can deliver jobs, are the job makers. Not government. And the only one that can give you prosperity, is *YOU*. The number one factor in you being prosperous, is you.