Jump to content


Wealth Inequality in America


Recommended Posts

That guy with 1% stack of cash has NO effect on anyone else's stack of cash in the 99% below him.

 

Here's a good exercise for you budding socialists out there that drink this sort of stuff up.

 

Think about the wealthiest person you know, and explain how their wealth is stopping you from growing yours.

 

You won't be able to honestly conclude someone else's wealth is preventing you from obtaining your own....you'll have to simply come up with some sort of abstract 'them vs. us' argument that is based on false economic premises that somehow lead you to conclude that 'fairness' can only happen through wealth redistribution. You don't have the power to steal someone else's wealth, but you can put into power politicians who promise to do it for you.

 

---

 

It's not the disparity in the stacks of cash that is the problem - nor is the tax to redistribute the wealth a solution.

 

The issue is in an education system that is failing to produce capable and inspired citizens.

 

The issue is in a government that is more than willing to absorb your own personal responsibilities in exchange for your dependence.

 

The issue is in a political/news system that is so incredibly watered down with emotions and feelings -- common sense, logic and long term planning are going extinct.

 

---

 

The 1% are getting wealthier because the folks in the 99% are getting less competitive.

Congratulations, you have fallen for the right wing propaganda. Less competitive my backside. Productivity is at an all time high, corporate incomes are doing great (as the stock market indicates, and cash on hand) and companies are cutting benefits perks and not giving raises. Ask yourself, who benefits from 401K's over pension plans? Its sure as hell isn't the workers. Know any company who does profit sharing anymore? They are almost non-existent.

 

As the income tax rate decreased for the top earners, they gave themselves bigger and bigger raises. The gains got so much larger, and unfettered greed flourished. How do the 1% keep others from making more? Simple, by refusing to pay people more. They control the wages for a massive portion of the country, and the unethical practices of mega corps like Wal-mart have brought down wages in whole industries.

 

The breaking of the unions is another reason. Unions demanded better wages for workers, as they have dies, the above has accelerated.

 

The further pushing of more companies to go public as opposed to being privately held is another reason. Publicly traded companies consider a small gain for the year the same as a failure, and will withhold raises or layoff workers as a result. Private companies are not as prone to doing this, small businesses don't. And guess who holds most of the stocks?

  • Fire 5
Link to comment

In a capitalist economy, there are going to be people who have great amounts of wealth, those who don't have much of anything, and those who fall somewhere in the middle. There is not a solution because there does not need to be.

I find it amazing, and somehow completely unsurprising that you are championing unfettered greed after debates in other threads. Kinda proves my point though

  • Fire 3
Link to comment

The more you learn about how entire financial system is constructed (it's all debt! all of it!) the more you realize that a) the super rich have the ability to easily get even more super-rich and b) due to the scarcity of money as a result of the P =/= P+I equation, this wealth comes at the cost of the middle and lower classes. These classes as a result can afford to take on less and less new debt, which results in an even smaller money supply, which depresses the economy and decreases the money supply even further. There's a reason that the 2007-2008 financial crisis was blamed on greed.

  • Fire 3
Link to comment

That guy with 1% stack of cash has NO effect on anyone else's stack of cash in the 99% below him.

 

......

 

Think about the wealthiest person you know, and explain how their wealth is stopping you from growing yours.

 

You won't be able to honestly conclude someone else's wealth is preventing you from obtaining your own....you'll have to simply come up with some sort of abstract 'them vs. us' argument that is based on false economic premises that somehow lead you to conclude that 'fairness' can only happen through wealth redistribution. You don't have the power to steal someone else's wealth, but you can put into power politicians who promise to do it for you.

 

---

 

It's not the disparity in the stacks of cash that is the problem - nor is the tax to redistribute the wealth a solution.

 

The issue is in an education system that is failing to produce capable and inspired citizens.

 

The issue is in a government that is more than willing to absorb your own personal responsibilities in exchange for your dependence.

 

The issue is in a political/news system that is so incredibly watered down with emotions and feelings -- common sense, logic and long term planning are going extinct.

 

---

 

The 1% are getting wealthier because the folks in the 99% are getting less competitive.

 

You have literally no idea how the modern economy and financial system works. Beyond that, your social and political views are way off base. Congrats!

  • Fire 4
Link to comment

I think there is a solution, one the right wing would stroke out about. Set an allowable percentage difference between the top paid wage in a company and the lowest payed wage. Take into account all stock earnings, benefits and so on. And company violating that difference has all corporate earnings taxed at 99%. The shift would be moving pay out of the board of directors and the rest of the lettered positions and spread it out across the rest of a company. With this system the gov didn't directly pay anyone anything, or take anything from anyone. unless they get greedy. Stockholders would force the pay changes, or they would never earn from the investment again. You would see the trend of the top guys in a company earning millions upon millions and having employees working fulltime and living in poverty come to an end

Link to comment

The further pushing of more companies to go public as opposed to being privately held is another reason. Publicly traded companies consider a small gain for the year the same as a failure, and will withhold raises or layoff workers as a result. Private companies are not as prone to doing this, small businesses don't. And guess who holds most of the stocks?

all excellent points, but i would like to elaborate on this one. publicly traded companies only care about the end of the quarter, they only think in terms of three months forecasts. that is why gm failed (along with paying more for healthcare than steel, but that is another issue. although, it is probably why universal healthcare finally became a viable option). they cared more about quarterly profits than having a competitive business plan for the future. they were giving out promotional discounts (their popular employee price discount) rather than developing cars people actually wanted to buy or were at all innovative. sure, they would have a good quarter, but the ground was shrinking beneath their feet.

Link to comment

The more you learn about how entire financial system is constructed (it's all debt! all of it!) the more you realize that a) the super rich have the ability to easily get even more super-rich and b) due to the scarcity of money as a result of the P =/= P+I equation, this wealth comes at the cost of the middle and lower classes. These classes as a result can afford to take on less and less new debt, which results in an even smaller money supply, which depresses the economy and decreases the money supply even further. There's a reason that the 2007-2008 financial crisis was blamed on greed.

it is also why people ask, "where did all the money go", after a bust. it was never there to begin, that is the turn. the prestige is when banks start lending again because people start spending. *poof* money magically reappears.

Link to comment

The more you learn about how entire financial system is constructed (it's all debt! all of it!) the more you realize that a) the super rich have the ability to easily get even more super-rich and b) due to the scarcity of money as a result of the P =/= P+I equation, this wealth comes at the cost of the middle and lower classes. These classes as a result can afford to take on less and less new debt, which results in an even smaller money supply, which depresses the economy and decreases the money supply even further. There's a reason that the 2007-2008 financial crisis was blamed on greed.

it is also why people ask, "where did all the money go", after a bust. it was never there to begin, that is the turn. the prestige is when banks start lending again because people start spending. *poof* money magically reappears.

All the more reason to rebuild the wall between commercial and investment banks. Not having that barrier is the core reason that damned near brought down the world economy in 2008.

Link to comment

In a capitalist economy, there are going to be people who have great amounts of wealth, those who don't have much of anything, and those who fall somewhere in the middle. There is not a solution because there does not need to be.

I find it amazing, and somehow completely unsurprising that you are championing unfettered greed after debates in other threads. Kinda proves my point though

let us not forget that huskershark is underestimating the facts. the super-rich have almost all of it and the rest of a small percentage of what is left over. that describes a quintessential third world nation (now we just need civil wars and coups and we will be there).

Link to comment

The more you learn about how entire financial system is constructed (it's all debt! all of it!) the more you realize that a) the super rich have the ability to easily get even more super-rich and b) due to the scarcity of money as a result of the P =/= P+I equation, this wealth comes at the cost of the middle and lower classes. These classes as a result can afford to take on less and less new debt, which results in an even smaller money supply, which depresses the economy and decreases the money supply even further. There's a reason that the 2007-2008 financial crisis was blamed on greed.

it is also why people ask, "where did all the money go", after a bust. it was never there to begin, that is the turn. the prestige is when banks start lending again because people start spending. *poof* money magically reappears.

All the more reason to rebuild the wall between commercial and investment banks. Not having that barrier is the core reason that damned near brought down the world economy in 2008.

what a coincidence that after the first great depression the gov't created new regulations (one of the most important being the compartmentalizing of financial institutions) that were successful for nearly 80 years, but after the deregulation that started in the 80's we see the second greatest economic collapse in american history?

Link to comment

That guy with 1% stack of cash has NO effect on anyone else's stack of cash in the 99% below him.

 

......

 

Think about the wealthiest person you know, and explain how their wealth is stopping you from growing yours.

 

You won't be able to honestly conclude someone else's wealth is preventing you from obtaining your own....you'll have to simply come up with some sort of abstract 'them vs. us' argument that is based on false economic premises that somehow lead you to conclude that 'fairness' can only happen through wealth redistribution. You don't have the power to steal someone else's wealth, but you can put into power politicians who promise to do it for you.

 

most republicans (e.g. koch brothers, sheldon adelson, karl rove) would agree.

 

---

 

It's not the disparity in the stacks of cash that is the problem - nor is the tax to redistribute the wealth a solution.

 

The issue is in an education system that is failing to produce capable and inspired citizens.

 

The issue is in a government that is more than willing to absorb your own personal responsibilities in exchange for your dependence.

 

The issue is in a political/news system that is so incredibly watered down with emotions and feelings -- common sense, logic and long term planning are going extinct.

 

---

 

The 1% are getting wealthier because the folks in the 99% are getting less competitive.

 

the litany you provided is nothing more than abstracts, not to mention your notions of 'productivity' and 'efficiency'.

Link to comment

so yes, i opened a whole new can of worms, but anyone who knows anything about the economy knows that it is all connected and raising the minimum wage would certainly go along way with helping people's spending power only at the cost of massive corporate profits.

The economy is connected. Yes.

 

But raising the minimum wage hardly 'helps' the people with the only cost being corporate profits.

 

A discussion on the Minimum wage deserves it's own thread.

 

It's a very interesting topic depending on multiple economic principles...but unfortunately it's become an emotional political issue.

Link to comment

so yes, i opened a whole new can of worms, but anyone who knows anything about the economy knows that it is all connected and raising the minimum wage would certainly go along way with helping people's spending power only at the cost of massive corporate profits.

The economy is connected. Yes.

 

But raising the minimum wage hardly 'helps' the people with the only cost being corporate profits.

 

A discussion on the Minimum wage deserves it's own thread.

 

It's a very interesting topic depending on multiple economic principles...but unfortunately it's become an emotional political issue.

what? for who? and what does that matter?

Link to comment

so yes, i opened a whole new can of worms, but anyone who knows anything about the economy knows that it is all connected and raising the minimum wage would certainly go along way with helping people's spending power only at the cost of massive corporate profits.

The economy is connected. Yes.

 

But raising the minimum wage hardly 'helps' the people with the only cost being corporate profits.

 

A discussion on the Minimum wage deserves it's own thread.

 

It's a very interesting topic depending on multiple economic principles...but unfortunately it's become an emotional political issue.

what? for who? and what does that matter?

The term that will get marched out immediately is 'class warfare' which Fox has done such a great job riling the poor people up to defend the ultra wealthy. The right wing has done such a masterful job of convincing people to vote against their own economic interests.

  • Fire 2
Link to comment

the litany you provided is nothing more than abstracts, not to mention your notions of 'productivity' and 'efficiency'.

 

Are you asking me to explain why wealth is a byproduct of productivity and efficiency? In more specific terms?

 

I don't understand your comment or question.

Link to comment
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...