I believe that you were probably just pulled into it by jake and jsh1120

anyway back to the topic, you wrote

That's an interesting and possible point, I wonder if one can actually find real numbers on this. Its probably worth looking into. The problem with this is that the numbers are always so fuzzy, hard to find, or usually coerced bya closed minded political opinion.

Bad numbers such as I earlier mentioned about the ones used to determine the poverty level in America, only taking in to account the cost of groceries and not transportation or housing. If you try to get numbers on how many actual families are homeless in this country it gets even fuzzier.

Never the less, I would like to know if in fact alot of people are getting richer and no ones getting poorer, and thats what causing this gap or not, but wouldn't that mean that no extra people would be falling behind into poverty? I rather believe that both are happening, Their are becoming more wealthy people in this country, while at the same time there are also more families falling into poverty conditions, Anyway it would be interesting to see real true actual numbers on where we as a nation are headed. I may be wrong.

You also said

Funny, but I get called alot of strange things too. No matter what I say

you also wrote

If you listen to Lee Iaccoca, you will find he agrees with you too. And this was a man who [u]was[/u] a major CEO, and who turned a failing major corporation completely around. So you would think he would know about such things.

__________________
America stated that all men are created equal.
Communism stated that they should br treated that way. . . . It would further seem neither of them practice what they preach

While Walmart may be an easy and convenient target, some data corrections are in order.

Some clips from this article dated 4/20/2007...

http://www.marke(*)(*)(*)(*)ch.com/news/stor...73651547A1B%7D

And on minimum wage, while it may be $5.15 right this second, I can only presume that you are aware of the increases signed into law that take effect on July 24th of this year and bring the minimum up to $7.25 by next year.

Ironically, the CEO has proactively endorsed increases to the minimum wage as early as October of 2005. And while I am confident that it's not rooted in benevolence (minimum wage increases hurt Walmart competition in the form of small family businesses more than Walmart), Mr. Scott seems to agree with you.

In short, exaggerations and poorly chosen targets make the point less valid.

__________________
"Politicians, like diapers, have to be changed frequently... and for the very same reason."

This days I know that 300$ worth of groceries can last me maybe 7 days and I live by my self. How in the world average American family survive through a month I am asking you?? (and myself every day).

p.s i am not fat or anything

That is dumn, "Small family businesses" are just that. I don't see that increasing the minimum wage is going to change anything. If anything is changed it will be large corporate profits. Corporations are taking over everything and you are helping to fascilitate that.

Anyway, it is getting harder and harder for people to enter the market anyhow.

On Abortion - I heard it said that a baby is not a baby until it is given the breath of life. You are being oppressors by telling other people what they should and should not do.

The ironic misspelling of the word "dumb" aside, if raising the minimum wage isn't going to change anything, than why advocate it? I don't happen to agree with you though... it does change things - only the degree and the audience are really up for debate.

Heh - hardly. What changes is the cost of goods and services. Corporations don't sacrifice profits as a general rule.

This should be grand. Please tell me how I am helping to facilitate corporations "taking over everything." And as an additional challenge, please tell me how I'm doing any such thing without making any assumptions about me?

This puts the "anal" in analogy (presuming the off-topic reference to abortion is supposed to be, since I certainly never mentioned it. Please explain.

__________________
"Politicians, like diapers, have to be changed frequently... and for the very same reason."

Boy, that's a really sad statement Jake - and unfortunately it says a lot more about you than it does about "them".

Seems to me that "they" don't accept your definition of "this country" - since it seems to leave them out.

Seems to me, that this is a problem you have to deal with - and if your only "solution" is to vote in another guy like Bush, then you've lost before you've even started.

Let's face it, Bushie has done more to wreck this country than any other President in my living memory - and while he started out in roughly the same "no compromise" camp that you seem to be in, any astute observer would have to say at this point that he's become a bit more "liberal" in that regard lately.

Hey, let me ask you a question - is "redistribution of wealth" only equivalent to socialism when it flows top-down? How about when the money flows from the poor to the rich, is that socialism too? Think about it.....

wait......what i understand reduce the wealth gap but reduce the growing income. i thought the plan was to increase peoples income or just give them the money.so your statement confuseded me

__________________
In a free society, the government's job is simply to protect liberty- the people do the rest.

You really are Full of Hate just like the Terrorists are.
I'm sure the terrorists used the exact same words when talking about Americans.
Didn't they use the word "destroyers" to describe America?
America is continuing to "Destroy" Iraq.
It's really sad to read your replies here.
You label everyone.
I guess it's easier to hate when you put labels on people.
Does it help you sleep better at night?
Since your country is divided 50 -50 I guess that mean you must hate half the people in your country.
The think you fail to realize is that those people you label "liberals" are AMERICANS!!

Your reply did not even admit what I said in my post was right.

BOTH Dems, AND REPS have caused the problems in America.

Both parties have been in power and have NOT changed things to stop the gap between the haves and the have nots like the topic of this thread is all about.
Try putting your labeling hate aside and actually proving me wrong instead of spewing your racist hatred comments.
Try telling us how your 50% has contributed to shrinking the gap.
All you can do is play the blame game and say it's all the liberals fault.
How was it the liberals fault when your party was in control of the country?

I looked but I couldn't find the article anywhere. It was in our local paper last week but it wasn't on the online site and I couldn't find it on google. But it basically said that the gap between the haves and have nots is increasing but because more people are becoming haves than have nots, I don't know if I agree with this, because there are so many people in the country living on or below the poverty line.

I have talked about helping the homeless, but for one am just as concerned with families who do have homes and work 2 and 3 jobs to just scrape by. That seems ridiculous to me that anybody in this country would have to do that and not get help. I went to school with kids whose parents many times had to choose between electricity and food. Lots of my friends had to drop out and get jobs because the family couldn't make it work. So for anybody to say that people don't need welfare, anybody can become rich if they just work hard is just bs. This is where I usually get labeled a socialist, but I have nothing against socialists so it's ok.

I don't think it's that people are getting richer and nobody's getting poorer, I think it's that more people are moving up than there are moving down. I think your assessment is correct and I too would be interested to see the real numbers.

Yes, he is a very smart man.

Ok true, I didn't do a lot of research on my point and chose a poor target, but there are many CEO's who do make that much money. Look at the Oil companies for example. But here's a link to a good article, the image at the top is pretty striking though. It's just pathetic.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/10/ma...ln-lede-t.html