Inequality in America - How we arrived where we are / whats your opinion?

[351 power]

round and round we go. tm7 is right, this is not about personal stoicism it's about a system in decline. all the chest thumping in the world can't reverse that

[scootrd]

tm7 is right, this is not about personal stoicism it's about a system in decline.

Agreed , he is absolutely correct.
I don't mind playing any game unless the game i'm being asked to play is rigged from the start.

No one is asking for anything but a level playing field, where all play by the same rules. Not different rules for just the most affluent among us. 

I'd be happy if we just started with more equality within our tax codes and true tax reforms.

Semper Fi

It astounds me those that replace opinion as fact,  in lieu of true statistical factual data.

[45-70.gov]

nobody plays by the same rules


because no ones perception of the rules is the same


if inequality  just happens   and you need government to dreate equality


then those in control of government  are not equal to Those that don't


SOME one will  exert force onto anther in the name of equality
how equal  is that


EQUALTY   WILL NEVER EXIST  and is pointless to try to acheive

[ChungDoQuan]

http://www.whitehousedossier.com/2013/01/04/taxpayer-bill-obamas-hawaii-vacations-20-million/

Total cost of the Obamas' vacations is $20 mil since he was first elected.

[mcwoodduck]

tm7 is right, this is not about personal stoicism it's about a system in decline.

Agreed , he is absolutely correct.
I don't mind playing any game unless the game i'm being asked to play is rigged from the start.

No one is asking for anything but a level playing field, where all play by the same rules. Not different rules for just the most affluent among us. 

I'd be happy if we just started with more equality within our tax codes and true tax reforms.

Semper Fi

It astounds me those that replace opinion as fact,  in lieu of true statistical factual data.

just clearify a few things for me?
Hasn't Obama and the left been in charge for the first two years in office, and then has held the Senate through out his terms in office? 
So if we are in decline isn't it with the Liberals at the Helm?  And if we are in decline is it the liberal ideas that do not work? 

[ChungDoQuan]

tm7 is right, this is not about personal stoicism it's about a system in decline.

Agreed , he is absolutely correct.
I don't mind playing any game unless the game i'm being asked to play is rigged from the start.

No one is asking for anything but a level playing field, where all play by the same rules. Not different rules for just the most affluent among us. 

I'd be happy if we just started with more equality within our tax codes and true tax reforms.

Semper Fi

It astounds me those that replace opinion as fact,  in lieu of true statistical factual data.

just clearify a few things for me?
Hasn't Obama and the left been in charge for the first two years in office, and then has held the Senate through out his terms in office? 
So if we are in decline isn't it with the Liberals at the Helm?  And if we are in decline is it the liberal ideas that do not work?

Not at all. The Congress has to act for ANYTHING to happen. They have done NOTHING, zip, nada. Liberals have not been able to try any of their ideas. The entire government is still operating under basically the same rules as it was in the last administration, so you can not say that the Liberals' ideas have not worked--- they haven't been allowed to try them. The rightys have the "check" part down solid; I think they should try for more "balance." That won't happen, though: the right is petrified that Liberal ideas WILL work to turn the economy around. They are so afraid of this that they are keeping a stranglehold on the government to avoid that, even while the people suffer.

[mcwoodduck]

tm7 is right, this is not about personal stoicism it's about a system in decline.

Agreed , he is absolutely correct.
I don't mind playing any game unless the game i'm being asked to play is rigged from the start.

No one is asking for anything but a level playing field, where all play by the same rules. Not different rules for just the most affluent among us. 

I'd be happy if we just started with more equality within our tax codes and true tax reforms.

Semper Fi

It astounds me those that replace opinion as fact,  in lieu of true statistical factual data.

just clearify a few things for me?
Hasn't Obama and the left been in charge for the first two years in office, and then has held the Senate through out his terms in office? 
So if we are in decline isn't it with the Liberals at the Helm?  And if we are in decline is it the liberal ideas that do not work?

Not at all. The Congress has to act for ANYTHING to happen. They have done NOTHING, zip, nada. Liberals have not been able to try any of their ideas. The entire government is still operating under basically the same rules as it was in the last administration, so you can not say that the Liberals' ideas have not worked--- they haven't been allowed to try them. The rightys have the "check" part down solid; I think they should try for more "balance." That won't happen, though: the right is petrified that Liberal ideas WILL work to turn the economy around. They are so afraid of this that they are keeping a stranglehold on the government to avoid that, even while the people suffer.

In 2009 wasn't Obama in the white house with Nancy Pelosi in charge of the house and Harry Reid in charge of the Senate?
WHat history are you trying to rewrite?

[silverpelican]

Hello
You Guys scare me....here I thought I was safe and sound with a bunch of fellow gun nuts......it seems that this crowd and especially this thread is like taking a quick course or two or three in post graduate economics, public policy, and good old fashioned common sense.  Collectively there is more usefull commentary in this thread that 10 years of the Journal of Foreign Relations......my beret and or 10 gallon hat is off to you all.......Bravo one and all....now back to the 19th century.....where I belong.....silverpelican
ps.   maybe there is hope for this country, with such insight.....keep up the good work Men! and Women of Graybeard.....

[ChungDoQuan]

tm7 is right, this is not about personal stoicism it's about a system in decline.

Agreed , he is absolutely correct.
I don't mind playing any game unless the game i'm being asked to play is rigged from the start.

No one is asking for anything but a level playing field, where all play by the same rules. Not different rules for just the most affluent among us. 

I'd be happy if we just started with more equality within our tax codes and true tax reforms.

Semper Fi

It astounds me those that replace opinion as fact,  in lieu of true statistical factual data.

just clearify a few things for me?
Hasn't Obama and the left been in charge for the first two years in office, and then has held the Senate through out his terms in office? 
So if we are in decline isn't it with the Liberals at the Helm?  And if we are in decline is it the liberal ideas that do not work?

Not at all. The Congress has to act for ANYTHING to happen. They have done NOTHING, zip, nada. Liberals have not been able to try any of their ideas. The entire government is still operating under basically the same rules as it was in the last administration, so you can not say that the Liberals' ideas have not worked--- they haven't been allowed to try them. The rightys have the "check" part down solid; I think they should try for more "balance." That won't happen, though: the right is petrified that Liberal ideas WILL work to turn the economy around. They are so afraid of this that they are keeping a stranglehold on the government to avoid that, even while the people suffer.

In 2009 wasn't Obama in the white house with Nancy Pelosi in charge of the house and Harry Reid in charge of the Senate?
WHat history are you trying to rewrite?

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20121106083917AALpVIq

Democrats have NEVER had a super majority since 1883. They actually controlled the White house, Senate, and Congress with a simple majority for 60 days. THIS YEAR the government worked eight days total for the first 60 they were in office. There has been no time when the Liberals were strong enough to push anything through if the right wanted to block it. Too much FauxNews makes one uninformed.

[Oldshooter]

There has been no time when the Liberals were strong enough to push anything through if the right wanted to block it

    That's the ticket , they are scared the liberal ideas will work.......     Obama care was such a good thing, and the spendylus, heck wass a matter wit dem fools. Don't they know progress when they see it.  Seems nobody stopped that madness.

[ChungDoQuan]

There is no way to know without trying it. Everybody KNOWS what the rights plan gives us--- what we got now. The past 30 years before Obama ended up nearly in another Depression.

[Empty Quiver]

tm7 is right, this is not about personal stoicism it's about a system in decline.

Agreed , he is absolutely correct.
I don't mind playing any game unless the game i'm being asked to play is rigged from the start.

No one is asking for anything but a level playing field, where all play by the same rules. Not different rules for just the most affluent among us. 

I'd be happy if we just started with more equality within our tax codes and true tax reforms.

Semper Fi

It astounds me those that replace opinion as fact,  in lieu of true statistical factual data.

just clearify a few things for me?
Hasn't Obama and the left been in charge for the first two years in office, and then has held the Senate through out his terms in office? 
So if we are in decline isn't it with the Liberals at the Helm?  And if we are in decline is it the liberal ideas that do not work?

Not at all. The Congress has to act for ANYTHING to happen. They have done NOTHING, zip, nada. Liberals have not been able to try any of their ideas. The entire government is still operating under basically the same rules as it was in the last administration, so you can not say that the Liberals' ideas have not worked--- they haven't been allowed to try them. The rightys have the "check" part down solid; I think they should try for more "balance." That won't happen, though: the right is petrified that Liberal ideas WILL work to turn the economy around. They are so afraid of this that they are keeping a stranglehold on the government to avoid that, even while the people suffer.

In 2009 wasn't Obama in the white house with Nancy Pelosi in charge of the house and Harry Reid in charge of the Senate?
WHat history are you trying to rewrite?

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20121106083917AALpVIq

Democrats have NEVER had a super majority since 1883. They actually controlled the White house, Senate, and Congress with a simple majority for 60 days. THIS YEAR the government worked eight days total for the first 60 they were in office. There has been no time when the Liberals were strong enough to push anything through if the right wanted to block it. Too much FauxNews makes one uninformed.

So it has been 130 years since the American people have trusted the Democratic party with that much power? Can we all learn something from that?    I'm going to go ahead and admit I'm not comfortable with any single party having the power to ram through legislation unilaterally. Surely anyone can see the danger there.

[gstewart44]

 Liberals have not been able to try any of their ideas. The entire government is still operating under basically the same rules as it was in the last administration, so you can not say that the Liberals' ideas have not worked--- they haven't been allowed to try them. The rightys have the "check" part down solid; I think they should try for more "balance." That won't happen, though: the right is petrified that Liberal ideas WILL work to turn the economy around. They are so afraid of this that they are keeping a stranglehold on the government to avoid that, even while the people suffer.

It's Bush's fault.......        yup.... the Libs cannot admit failure so they kick the ball back to GW.....

[ChungDoQuan]

Excellent!

[45-70.gov]

How the 1% weaponize inflation and extract more wealth from The People while pilfering the system:
.

.
 
 
.
.
.....TM7

this is great
it reaffirms  what i said


the RICH get RICHER  doing what makes the RICH
[investing in the stock market...etc]


and the POOR  keep getting POORER  doing what made tham POOR
[living pay check to pay check]


inflation  is going to happen.....you can whine and fight it  and be poor me
or you can  invest in a mutual fund and  IRA


do you realy think  some one is out there to help  you??
if they wanted to help  you...there are many ahead of you with a hand out
before they can help you....they have to be smart enough to help themselves


have you ever  noticed....
those that are the most geneous  are the ones with the least to offer
those with the most to offer.....pay attention to  where it goes when they give it up

[scootrd]

and the POOR  keep getting POORER  doing what made tham POOR
[living pay check to pay check]......or you can  invest in a mutual fund and  IRA


You really cannot be serious..or at least this naive. All I can gather is some live in a bubble far away from the true economic realities facing American families today.

Economics 101. Purchasing power vs income.  Purchasing power has fallen dramatically.  Wages have remained stagnant , Yet cost of living high and going up.  Do you really think a family as you state living "paycheck to paycheck" has an opportunity to invest in a mutual fund?.

I really think some folks should spend some time employed as a wallmart checker for example , and see just how much discretionary $$ they have left at the end of the month to put towards a mutual fund investment. Hell , Wall-mart folks cannot even afford their own company's HC plans let alone a mutual fund investment.



Here is a very simple (yet dated ) example just to put it in personal perspective 



As inflation rises it only get worse.  Now go forth service industry wall mart person with your stagnant wages and less purchasing power for necessities  and invest in a mutual fund.  Ridiculous.

[Empty Quiver]

A wal mart checker equivalent job in 1912 would not raise a family then any more than it will now.


A skilled tradesman could always raise a family on his wage and it remains so today.


The problem is that there are fewer per capita skilled opportunities now. Kicking the crap out of those who are making good money does not change that. If I am wrong please enlighten me.


How are you going to entice the "greedy bastards" to invest their money in American industry? Promise them higher tax liability on income? Promise them more government regulation and intervention? Maybe the promise of a surly and entitlement mentality in the workforce, the specter of unionization if the business does show a profit.


Are you willing to be the next General Motors building a new factory in the next Detroit?


This 21st century service economy is the reason for what we see, plain and simple. The shoe shine man has never out earned the cobbler. The bottom is where the problem lies. you try to frame this as a too much money at the top. The problem is there is too little money at the bottom.

[Oldshooter]

 

[size=78%]An increase in the taxes imposed on goods may lead to a cost-push situation as well, since suppliers transfer the costs to consumers. .[/size]

[size=78%]If you increase taxes  on corporations, guess who's gonna pay it. The consumer. Duhhh!  The regime wants more taxes, do the math.[/size]




Inflation decreases the purchasing power of currency by reducing the amount of goods or services a person can get for the same amount of money.


The government is spending to much money, printing too much money . Shows no interest in slowing any of that down.  There are 47% of the people that pay no taxes. 52% pay the taxes.  The people on the dole want more entitlements. With inflation on the rise due to all the above mentioned diseases its not going to get better.


I really feel for those that are losing jobs and being treated badly by bean counting managers but it isn't a new thing, its been going on for years. But the government is getting bigger and it produces nothing but more government, taxes and national bankruptcy. 


I could offer some solutions but...... It would be a waste of my time.

[mcwoodduck]

tm7 is right, this is not about personal stoicism it's about a system in decline.

Agreed , he is absolutely correct.
I don't mind playing any game unless the game i'm being asked to play is rigged from the start.

No one is asking for anything but a level playing field, where all play by the same rules. Not different rules for just the most affluent among us. 

I'd be happy if we just started with more equality within our tax codes and true tax reforms.

Semper Fi

It astounds me those that replace opinion as fact,  in lieu of true statistical factual data.

just clearify a few things for me?
Hasn't Obama and the left been in charge for the first two years in office, and then has held the Senate through out his terms in office? 
So if we are in decline isn't it with the Liberals at the Helm?  And if we are in decline is it the liberal ideas that do not work?

Not at all. The Congress has to act for ANYTHING to happen. They have done NOTHING, zip, nada. Liberals have not been able to try any of their ideas. The entire government is still operating under basically the same rules as it was in the last administration, so you can not say that the Liberals' ideas have not worked--- they haven't been allowed to try them. The rightys have the "check" part down solid; I think they should try for more "balance." That won't happen, though: the right is petrified that Liberal ideas WILL work to turn the economy around. They are so afraid of this that they are keeping a stranglehold on the government to avoid that, even while the people suffer.

In 2009 wasn't Obama in the white house with Nancy Pelosi in charge of the house and Harry Reid in charge of the Senate?
WHat history are you trying to rewrite?

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20121106083917AALpVIq

Democrats have NEVER had a super majority since 1883. They actually controlled the White house, Senate, and Congress with a simple majority for 60 days. THIS YEAR the government worked eight days total for the first 60 they were in office. There has been no time when the Liberals were strong enough to push anything through if the right wanted to block it. Too much FauxNews makes one uninformed.

Again more liberal Crap.  The Democrats had a super Majority in congress in the 90's when they pushed through a tax increase after Bush said read my lips and with thier super Majority they over rode the veto. 
SO you are saying that no matter what he left wants to do to take our freedoms and rights the Right can block it?  So the constitution is all wrong and we have a right wing kabal that is actually running the country.  Take off your foil hat.  the left is the one that is conspiring to run the country.

[mcwoodduck]

Scrod,
If you look every dip in the value of the dollar is just after a tax increase or an increase in government spending.
Clearly if we want the Dollar to be worth more we simply cut government spending and reduce taxes. 
and if we want the reverse we just need to ellect Democrats to raise taxes and increase spending and you will have nothing left.

[ChungDoQuan]

The rich get richer because they are already rich and HAVE the money to invest.

The poor get poorer because that money the rich are "making" has to come from someone.

[magooch]

That assumes that there is only one pie and that everyone has to munch on that one pie.  The fact is that there are pies out there waiting to be baked--waiting for the government to get out of the way and let the baking begin.  The rich will get richer, because they don't sit around and wait for something to happen; they make things happen when government gets the hell out of the way.

[45-70.gov]

The rich get richer because they are already rich and HAVE the money to invest.

The poor get poorer because that money the rich are "making" has to come from someone.

i am an uneducated carpenter
my dad died  a broke alcoholic
i retired at 53......57 now

[45-70.gov]

the poor keep make  poor choices 




and the good choices  keep  paying off better


but in the  end  inequality  is just a perception

[ChungDoQuan]

Very good example of the "I got mine, to h_ll with you" mentality so prevalent among the rightys.

[SHOOTALL]

Very good example of the "I got mine, to h_ll with you" mentality so prevalent among the rightys.

Well for over 40 years now I get up at 5 am go to work and for many of those years I worked 10 hour days , many sat and sundays. So when I work as I have in govt. run projects and around low income housing I see thousands of people in that time who would not work . Who used every method they could to advoid work and play the system. So yes your statement is very true in that case. I have offered jobs to those people and tried to help many get ahead not so much because I am a great human but because we needed dependable help and was willing to train these people. Out of a hundred or more I don't remember one sticking with it. When they  found out they would have to invest in themselves they quit.
Once more you show your lack of understanding or experince. If I may how many have you offered a job and spent funds to train ?

[ironglow]

"The poor are getting poorer"...  How limited you perspective is..due to lack of experience  You seem to have a very limited horizon of personal observation to draw upon.
  The "poor" are better off than they have ever been!  Let me take you back to my own experience circa 1950, and compare it with the whining poor of today.  Compare the following with today's "poor"..
 
  The folks in  my neighborhood; 
  1) Had no television, although almost all had a radio..usually just one.
 
 2) About half had a telephone.. of course none had a cell phone, and none of the kids had their own phone.
 
 3) Each family had a car or truck..Dad had a Model A truck, but walked to work in the winter (radiator alcohol was expensive and tended to evaporate)
 
4) About 75% had indoor plumbing..for the rest of us it was pump & carry every pail full.
 
 5)  "Going out to dinner" was about a 3 times a year event, and then only the parents.
 
 6) Fresh vegetables..came from the garden..and were produced by family labor.
 
 7)  Meat came either from the barn or the woods..occasionally from the local butcher..who my Dad did the killing for.
 
   By 1950 we had a refrigerator..as most did, but until then vegetables were what mom canned..or the sauerkraut & pickles she put up.
 
 9) No such thing as... food stamps, WIC, HEAP (we cut our own wood..or bought coal), or any of the other "lean on" programs; and the folks would have refused them if there were.
 
 10) Clothing had patches, sometimes patches upon patches.  We didn't need to buy jeans already half worn out.  ..And when they were worn out..it was HONEST wear.
 
  I could go on but I would hope you realize, the "poor" are better off now than ever.  With today's "safety net" (something that barely existed in 1950), almost nobody has a viable reason to stay "poor" unless they have taken on extra, unnecessary baggage; such as drink, dope, illegitimate child births, laziness or a criminal record.
   Then again, today's "poor" are material wise, better off that we in our neighborhood (lower middle class), were in 1950..
 
  Back then of course, most believed very much in God...and lived accordingly..
 

[DDZ]

When there are people to slap the poor label on, it just makes it so much easier to vilify the wealthy.

[351 power]

even if this debate was about the poor being lazy, do you realize that some of those poor people gave up the struggle because they could not see the light at the end of the tunnel. but this debate is about the rich finding ways to use their power to take advantage of the economy in general and specifically the less powerful/rich people within their business' influence. it is a complicated issue that can't be reduced to bootstrap solutions. at least everyone participating here has some concern for their fellow man. lots of the richest could not care at all who suffers from their greed.

[gstewart44]

.... lots of the richest could not care at all who suffers from their greed.

Yup Good ole Joe Biden averaged between 0.1 and 0.3% on charitable contributions over the past DECADE.    Thats about $369.00 per year.......  I'd say that shows just how much he cares about his fellow man....... NOT.