Wealth Inequality in America

[sd'sker]

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.

how is wealth a byproduct? more productivity and efficiency does not just create money out of thin air. a shoemaker can make a sh#t ton of shoes, but if no one has any money to buy those shoes, what good is productivity and how did that productivity create wealth?

[strigori]

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.

Its not. Its a result of controlling the system. As shown earlier in the thread we are at a point where productivity and efficiency is at a peak, and wages as adjusted for inflation are at a low. Except for the top 1% Its a rigged system right now. The top 1% control most of the money flow, as they hold most of the money. Stagnate wages, loot pensions, buy politicians to make favorable laws, and adjust the tax code to be more regressive to further their own wealth. Unless a person is among the extremely few who can create something culture changing, your ability to gain is very heavily influenced by those in the 1%

[gobiggergoredder]

I think the correct way to address this issue would be a consumption tax. If you spend high amounts of money, then pay taxes on it.

 

Every time something like this, I preach the same thing. We have lost manufacturing jobs in this country. We have been sold out by the crooks on both sides of the aisle. There are no reasonable jobs for a high school individual that is intelligent and wants to work. Furthermore, we are sending people through degree mills to come up to $20K service jobs.

 

I am concerned about how many corporations literately pay no taxes. I would also see them passing it along to the customer if things were to change. I don't see how this would be any different with minimum wage. In the end the middle class pays for it.

[gobiggergoredder]

 

Minor quibble . . . but our government isn't really on a drunken spending binge. Our annual deficit is shrinking.

http://www.politifac...a-has-lowest-s/

 

I'm just throwing this out there because I really have no data.

 

The chart above says 'using inflation adjusted dollars'. If wages are not increasing at the rate of inflation don't you actually have less money to spend (as an individual taxpayer)?

[gobiggergoredder]

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.

Is the right wing propaganda that you be rewarded for working harder than the guy next to you? When your mom told you 'You can do anything if you put your mind to it', was she really a bible toting righty? Pensions are much like social security...great when the masses don't live to 95 years old.

 

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.

I have a hard time arguing this. I have seen data that shows what wal-mart does to areas. The thing I struggle with is that people choose to shop there. I've always be interested to see how much government, or our tax money, actually flows through there via assistance.

 

 

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

It is a lazy blanket statement to say unions are broken just because of wages. I would love to have a union facility as my competitor any day.

 

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?

I've seen this argument before and it just doesn't make sense to me. Private companies are ok with loses? Who pushes a company to go from public to private?

[sd'sker]

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.

Is the right wing propaganda that you be rewarded for working harder than the guy next to you? When your mom told you 'You can do anything if you put your mind to it', was she really a bible toting righty? Pensions are much like social security...great when the masses don't live to 95 years old.

people should be rewarded for working hard. people should be given equal opportunity to work hard. if the guy next to you is in a poor neighborhood with failing schools, he will never have the same earning potential as someone who worked no harder but was afforded preparation for a college education. also, are you being rewarded for hard work when real income has declined the past 30 years? you have to work harder just to keep even, let alone get ahead.

 

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?

I've seen this argument before and it just doesn't make sense to me. Private companies are ok with loses? Who pushes a company to go from public to private?

no one is ok with loss, but public companies have to create results immediately, even at the cost of their future. private companies have more freedom to look and work towards the future.

 

in defense of wal-mart, it as increased people's spending power, but that is not enough to even out everything else it does to hurt workers and suppliers.

[gobiggergoredder]

people should be rewarded for working hard. people should be given equal opportunity to work hard. if the guy next to you is in a poor neighborhood with failing schools, he will never have the same earning potential as someone who worked no harder but was afforded preparation for a college education. also, are you being rewarded for hard work when real income has declined the past 30 years? you have to work harder just to keep even, let alone get ahead.

I don't know about work harder, but the dollar doesn't seem to go as far. It is definitely stressful.

 

If you believe this to be the case, then how can we not say that we have a spending problem? Is consideration of inflation really a fair footnote?

[sd'sker]

people should be rewarded for working hard. people should be given equal opportunity to work hard. if the guy next to you is in a poor neighborhood with failing schools, he will never have the same earning potential as someone who worked no harder but was afforded preparation for a college education. also, are you being rewarded for hard work when real income has declined the past 30 years? you have to work harder just to keep even, let alone get ahead.

I don't know about work harder, but the dollar doesn't seem to go as far. It is definitely stressful.

 

If you believe this to be the case, then how can we not say that we have a spending problem? Is consideration of inflation really a fair footnote?

the problem is that wages are not raised at an adequate pace. inflation really is not that bad, but that just shows how slow wages have increased.

 

i am not opposed to spending cuts. but austerity should be reserved for good times and the gov't needs to spend during the bad. even with the crazy spending of the past decade, going on decade and a half, we really have not seen inflation become a problem yet.

 

i mention inflation just to put wages in perspective. there is a natural rate of inflation that is inevitable.

[Conga3]

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.

how is wealth a byproduct? more productivity and efficiency does not just create money out of thin air. a shoemaker can make a sh#t ton of shoes, but if no one has any money to buy those shoes, what good is productivity and how did that productivity create wealth?

 

Let's say you work 8-hours a day, 5 days a week and spend 100% of your income on living expenses. At the end of each month your bank account is $0.

 

If you increase your productivity - and that can mean many things - or increase your efficiency - which can also mean many things - you will have a surplus at the end of the month.

 

This surplus is wealth.

 

And yes, 'money' is created out of thin air when an economy is more productive/efficient. Money is not matter.

 

-------

 

Economic concepts are sometimes difficult to wrap your head around.

 

For example, if you go to Walmart and grab a cart out of the parking lot instead of the cart rack at the front of the store, you are reducing the prices of the goods you are about to buy in the store. The amount maybe negligible, but the economic concept is nonetheless true.

 

---

The word 'productivity' is used throughout economic discussions but its meaning varies greatly.

 

Like the point made earlier that "productivity" gains have outpaced "wages" since the 70's...

 

These words/concepts are incredibly deceiving when discussing them at the level of the US Economy.

 

The MSNBC article and EPI report tried to correlate wages and productivity, but kinda sorta forgot to mention the biggest thing to happen in the last 30 years to effect productivity. Also, 'wages' is not compensation.

[Count 'Bility]

I quit watching in the first few seconds when it was 500 people were asked how they though wealth was distributed. I'm sick of this. Wealth is not distributed. It's earned. If you dont like what you earn, then find a way to earn more.

 

No, I didnt watch the entire video and I didnt read any of the thread. The title caugh my eye, and this is my simple opinion. This isnt China or Russia.

[BigRedBuster]

Wow.....

 

We should now erect a statue of Hugo in the Washington mall.

[Husker_x]

I quit watching in the first few seconds when it was 500 people were asked how they though wealth was distributed. I'm sick of this. Wealth is not distributed. It's earned. If you dont like what you earn, then find a way to earn more.

 

No, I didnt watch the entire video and I didnt read any of the thread. The title caugh my eye, and this is my simple opinion. This isnt China or Russia.

 

[Creighton Duke]

I quit watching in the first few seconds when it was 500 people were asked how they though wealth was distributed. I'm sick of this. Wealth is not distributed. It's earned. If you dont like what you earn, then find a way to earn more.

 

No, I didnt watch the entire video and I didnt read any of the thread. The title caugh my eye, and this is my simple opinion. This isnt China or Russia.

Totally agree. Go where/do something where you have a comparative advantage.

[carlfense]

I quit watching in the first few seconds when it was 500 people were asked how they though wealth was distributed. I'm sick of this. Wealth is not distributed. It's earned. If you dont like what you earn, then find a way to earn more.

Are you unfamiliar with the definition of "distributed" in a statistical sense? It doesn't mean that the money is handed out . . . it means who is holding what amount.

 

No, I didnt watch the entire video and I didnt read any of the thread. The title caugh my eye, and this is my simple opinion. This isnt China or Russia.

See above. Hopefully you'll realize your error.

[carlfense]

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

Wrong.

 

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

The 1% are getting wealthier because the unions have been broken and because at least one major political party is only concerned with increasing their wealth.