Income Inequality in America (2019)

Simple-Minded tripe - the sharing of the common-wealth that we all generate is innate to human fairness. That is, share equitably but not equally.

You've never been taught the concept of communal-fairness - not in your family, not in school, nowhere!

So, start here ... !

 

Who owns you?
I own my self; therefore, I own the product of my industry and trade.

 

Why don't they institute the Shark Tank show on the County level? See, I don't care any about this thread. Any other institutional failure pinned on money, first its rapping about it, then its 'capitalist'ing it, go back to furs? Then its removing gold standard. Now its regulating interstate and state commerce, on the most mundane transactions. Money cannot move A to B, it could even go B to A. Who's concerned, the IRS? Where are all these idiots heading toward? The Nation is responsible for the general economic competition. When companies succeed in the general economic competition, they get broken up as monopolies, I'll play your left forearm.

 

They are headed to MORE Control. Keep Govt money for the rich and putting HEAVY tax burdens on local economy's. We use to tax the rich guy that kept his money offshore at a high rate so that it could be equally distributed in America for ALL ITS PEOPLE. Today, those very guys control the media and the way masses think, and respond. What we write here means nothing today, maybe in 20 years because that is how long it will take before enough people are suffering.
Gold standard, then in the 80s deregulation and MAJOR tax cuts to the rich allowed them, guys like the Koch Brothers to start "THINK TANKS" put names on them like the FREEDOM FOUNDATION. FF reads as if it is something great for Americans, right ? Those 50+ billionaire paid entities are in business to do one thing. Make the gullible consumer continue his isolated (worry about me only) ways. Preach anti- democracy while supporting it thru flag waving. They support the "one man one equal tax" idea. That was the angle when they started. Now they have 100% deregulation under belt and growing fast inequality. It was never anything more than Greed and how could they (KEEP MORE OF THEIR MONEY)

Gonna get much worse before it gets better. Why would a billionaire want to pay taxes for 50,000 residence in a town that only has maybe 10 millionaires ? They dont, thus they band together to move politicians in their favor. Isolate each state, conquer and divide. You have 3 or 4 choices over the next 10 years. Florida, Texas, Wyoming, Delaware, and or anywhere in the south will be better than a liberal state. All the billionaires will move from them and thus there will be little tax rev. already lowering thus they take even more from the people.

It is actually all Tyranny in a vacuum. They all play like Trump, they just are not dumb enough to make it public. Listen to Peter Schiff sometime, that guy has gone as far as moving to PR to save on taxes, his father went to jail for tax evasion. He and many like him didnt want to pay, they were right in the fact the govt took too much at the time. 90% is too much and it should have been adjusted. Thus, they put a giant movement and money behind change and got it with Reagan. That was the paradigm and we still head the other way. Ad in China and America is toast, but until real NEWS and Honesty come out, Americans are none the wiser.

 

Well goooooooooollly said Andy to Barney... Use is so smart...

 

There no need to show causation when it's obvious. Right? Poor people are poor because rich people are rich, right? Well, by the same exact reasoning, skinny people are skinny because fat people are fat. If it's obvious; there's no need to show a causal relationship.

 

Unfortunately your simplistic approach is just a Utopian dream Marxists came up with

Here is the simple reality, income inequality exists because we are not equals, we don't have the same drive, ambition, skills or talent
Poverty is the default state of mankind.

The sharing of common wealth doesn't bring equality, eg Warren buffett who is pushing 90 has spent the last 60 years building a fortune and making others( shareholders) rich, he did things that others wouldn't do, do you believe he should share his wealth with some slacker living in his mothers basement playing video games hours at an end who has no ambition in life?

Bernard Arnault one of the richest in the world, designer of many items Ive never worn or bought, should he share his wealth with me because he has way more than myself?

The problem with communal fairness is our different ambition and drive, Robert Owen of New Harmony communal in the early stages of America found out the hard way that communal fairness was a crock

You cannot have a society of communal fairness and equality when we cannot agree on what is fair.

what is unique about America is we have equal opportunity to thrive, and some will thrive more than others, that is a fair system
reward the productive and super productive and those that become super wealthy as we seen has done more philanthropic work than the government.

 

State of mind, me arse!

Income Inequality is a measurable economic-quality of any nation. I wont go into the economic details, but you can find the most poignant infographic here. (From the OECD, btw.)

Note that the US has the highest value of disparity of any developed country, and therefore is the MOST INEQUITABLE ... !

PS: Name-calling (Marxist) is for children. If you want to play childish name-calling games, I invite you to go elsewhere!

 

OECD... LMFAO, okay then no bias there huh?

Do you know the history of the OECD? Im talking before 1961

says you, ever traveled to another country and explored how their poor citizens live, hint, it will be an eye opener
and Im talking developed countries not third or second world countries

Name calling? perhaps you need to get off your soap box pal, I thought being called a Marxist was a badge of honor for the folks on the left.

Who knew Marxist was considered name calling, just like Leftist calling us Trumpoids, Trumpsters, **********s, Cuckservatives blah blah blah

I dont get into "name calling" but I call it as I see it and if Marxist is considered "name calling" perhaps the political forums are not for you

prove me wrong

 

Nah and in 1890 no less, Rockefeller, and his Dimes, you guys remember this? The Monopoly when they were selling us, they're moral, they're the good guys, they are part of America, and failed, for Some Reason. I haven't looked into this. Rockefeller had a Suboordinate even, that had the Severence Hospital in Korea, like that old March of Dimes, the Rockefeller Dimes, well he tithes his tenth like a religious man so he can get it back again. Gives kids dimes. Far as I can tell, we silently already told the corporations they can't take over, or the chaebols.

 

You can't even get your economics right. The Marxists invented Communism, or No Income Inequality. Which did not work. It's history.

Only dimwits harp about Communism, which exists nowhere in the world except North Korea (that is trying-like-hell to get out from under it!)

Warren Buffet (one of America's richest individuals) and from an interview here:

Yes, Warren! And that "Default State" happens when a country does not do enough to help its fellow-mankind out of the Poverty Threshold. Which is precisely what is happening today in America! We are fully within a Change Of Ages! Meaning what?

We are exiting the Industrial Age and entering the Information Age. What's the difference? This:
*In the Industrial Age manufacturing was the major work sector. Today, it provides the US barely with ONLY 12% OF ALL JOBS! (See Bureau of Labor Statistics figures here!)
*The Information Age requires a higher-level set of intellectual capacity, which is why Post-secondary Education must be free, gratis and for nothing to all families that need it*. Just like secondary-schooling was adopted as a state-wide requirement in the US in the 19th and 20th centuries!
*And if we do not make Tertiary Education (vocational degree, associate, bachelor, masters, doctorate) very, very low-cost, then we shall NEVER EVER allow people to exit the Poverty Threshold and live decent lives.
*Never Ever - do you get it?

Eye Opener: The largest part of total American debt today is in post-secondary educational fees! From here: Consumer Debt Reaches $13 Trillion in 2018 - Experian

Wakey, wakey ...

*Which Hillary - the popular-vote choice of the entire American voting population - had promised for all families with a total income of 100K or less and the Electoral College snatched away from America's poor!

 

And that is the antiquated date PRECISELY at which your mentality is stuck!

It's time to wakey, wakey ... !

 

LMFAO

Too funny, Sorry, you don’t win the Ginsu knives, the year’s supply of Turtle Wax or even a copy of our home game. Your assessment of "communism" is ridiculously disconnected from reality.

Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels did not create "Communism," What Marx did was blend portions of the ideology of pre communism (commune living) and he called scientific socialism, some of the ideas from people who influence him such as Hegel, Feuerbach (although he dismissed them later) his writing partner Friedrich Engels, French Socialists Henri de Saint-Simon and Charles Fournier, the Paris Commune and a number of other ideologies combined.

The word “communism” first appeared in a book review by French novelist Restif de la Bretonne in 1785 review of his friend’s book “ Projet de communaute philosophe” translation “project for a philosophical community” by Victor D’Hupay a French Philosopher published in 1777.

one man's opinion, is he God now?

we should take his word as gospel, lets pass the collection place around, I admire Buffett business prowess , but he is a hypocrite he takes advantages of all the legal loopholes that his "secretary" or "staff" cannot, if he believe the rich should pay more then he should set the example and voluntary pay more to the IRS, you are allowed to that, but he has not done so.

They have ,Buffett, Gates and many other wealthy, they set up foundation so conquer the problem, yet we still have poverty
how many trillions did the government spend on conquering poverty since LBJ great society speech?

ad hominem when you cant make a point huh? tsk tsk, good luck to you slick
you've only proved your ignorance on the matter.

 

Thank you for confirming once again that in your view, slaves have no right to their liberty because it is property owned by someone else. You literally believe that slavery is morally right because slaves' rights to liberty are others' property, so the slaves have no right to liberty and therefore there is no reason to emancipate them. You are in favor of chattel slavery because slaves are property, and property rights take precedence over all other rights.

Sorry, but such beliefs are just pure evil.

 

Ah, no. Fat people don't get fat by taking food from skinny people. But rich people do get rich by taking wealth from poor people.

 

I have exactly as much reason to believe that fat people get fat by taking food from skinny people as I have to believe that rich people get rich by taking money from poor people.

 

Congratulations - you got both conjectures Really-'n-truly Wrong.

Your ignorance in the matter of upper-income taxation levels (both rates and allowed reductions) smells to high-heaven.

Moreover, may I present you an economic parameter that supports my contention. It's called the Level of National Income Disparity. See here - and I ask which is the developed country with the worst economic-fairness ... ?

 

There is no need to show causation when it's obvious. Poor people are obviously poor because rich people are rich, and skinny people are obviously skinny because fat people are fat.

The solutions are just as obvious. To end poverty, tax the rich. To end hunger, harvest the obese.

 

Simpleton explanations.

Poor people are poor, and rich people are rich. It matters to know why the difference exists in such a large scale.

Economists call the difference Income Disparity. The disparity can get very, very large - especially if elected government do nothing except to lower upper-income tax rates. Which this one has done.

Donald Dork created his reelection campaign the day after he was sworn into office. He has long had the intention of two terms. But, for that he knew he would need electoral-funding. (Which is why he reduced upper-income taxation, and the dollar-flood to his reelection campaign ensued.)

What the Replicants want to accomplish has been evident for some time. They manipulate American voters. Which it seems quite easily able to be done - given both Gerrymandering and the current EC. But, their facility of purpose was aided and abetted by ridiculously generous donations by the hyper-rich. They know he's "one-of-us".

Some may find this awesome - but the French have disallowed all TV political advertising! After all, don't we "sell" EVERYTHING via the TV?

As a consequence, the French TV channels put on numerous debates amongst the candidates for high office. For instance, the Presidency, which interests the most French voters.

I think that is not such a bad idea. We should not treat politics like popcorn - it is not to be bought/sold like a "commodity" - except in the minds of Replicants ...

 

But it's not you that's the problem. It's people who have more than you that are the problem.

 

No, not at all. What bothers me is called - in economic terms - Income Disparity. And when measured, the US turns out to be the most developed nation with the highest Income Disparity.

Of course, we can continue to disregard it. As we have done with Watts-One in 1965.

So, when Watts-Two happens but on a much larger scale nationwide, nobody should be surprised. Moreover, boyz-'n-girlz, with temperatures rising fatefully the moment is propitious for considerable personal harm to explode.

Diminished economic conditions and vicious personal-reaction have a way of going hand-in-hand historically since a very long time in human history ...

 

So what? Who cares if someone has more than they have? I don't care how much more other people have than me or anyone else. I don't see any more of a nexus between the rich and the poor than I see between the fat and the skinny.

 

OFF A CLIFF!

Bollocks again! You're making a bad habit of it!

You-singular are a member of a far larger community known as a Market-economy. But, you refuse to understand the Market-economics that decide your lifestyle - whether bountiful or the opposite (dreadful).

America seems fixated on celebrating wealth. I get very little US TV here in France, but what I see does not impress me in the least. You-plural are celebrating the "success" of a very minor portion of the American economy. And, if they have so much money it is not only due to some very good investments (for which they should be acclaimed) but due to the fact that Income is insufficiently taxed (above a certain high level) in the US since JFK in the early 1960s.

I liked JFK - but I cannot imagine who was consulting him and/or convinced him to lower upper-income tax rates. (Which he wanted to do for his father, who helped him financially to win the presidency. But, though interesting, that is another story.)

The point-being is that Democrats (JFK and LBJ) lowered erroneously upper-income taxation. Not much at first but 20-years later Reckless Ronnie occupied the White House and he managed to drastically lower upper income taxation.

See that particular bit of American history here. Note what happened first under JFK/LBJ and then again with Ronnie. And the decent-into-hell continued further until this very day. (Donald Dork has just financed his reelection campaign by reducing yet again upper-income taxation!)

For what purpose? Are Americans such fools that the believe the BS on TV? Well, that's what I think!

We've been had, and its time to do otherwise.

Look, I was transferred to work in France. I did not return to the US, but continued to live/work and found a family here in France. Why? Because I and my family here have National Healthcare Coverage (for which the costs are very moderate but highly professional) and I can send my kids to a post-secondary education that is either free (for vocational training) or only about 400/500 euros for higher-levels.(Associates/Bachelors/Masters/Doctorate).

Now what's important about that difference with the US? Here's what:
*First of all, bothe Healthcare and Higher-education are much less expensive here in Europe.
*Secondly, unlike Europe, most of the US private Financial Debt is generated by loans for higher-education!

Look, I love the US. But, something has changed viciously in the past half-century and today I fear that Uncle Sam is heading off a cliff ... !

 

We part ways so early on that there is no point in trying to find a common context. I do not think of myself, or others, first and foremost, as members of groups. I consider the individual's ownership of their self to be self-evident.

I do not doubt the benevolence of your intentions or the beneficence of their effects. However, because I value liberty (the individual's authority over and responsibility for their self) more than all that you hope to provide, indeed more than life itself, I am left to believe that the use of force, even the force of law, to impose one's best intentions upon others, should be reserved to the parents of small children. I simply do not value what you offer more than what you want in compensation for it. No thank you; I'm not buying it.