Income Inequality in America

[TiredOfLife]

Right..whatever you say, kid. I'm done. I concede you can fix the economic system in america and everyone will be equal and no one will have more money than anyone else..you just proved it to me.....:roll:

Thanks for dropping by to explain why nothing can be changed and it's all good. See ya.

 

[Mason66]

Outlaw computers, tablets, apps, video games, ipods and cellphones--the things the downtrodden waste their money on that goes either overseas or to the people at the top. Anything else I can do for you?

When I started Reading your comment I thought you were going to say to outlaw those ítems so you don't know what anybody else has and you can be happy with what you do have.

That would work too.

 

[P. Kersey]

Does that mean the money I have in my matterss and the chage in my cars ashtrays?

All of it. No holding out. We want everyone to be exactly equal, ya know. :roll:

 

[Mason66]

I think the first step would be to place a regulation/policy requiring solvent companies to give back a percentage or portion of their profit back to the earnings of their employees. Without them the whole operation would not be possible.

This already happens. It is called their salary.

If the employee bought stock inthe company, they make more.

Do you have the impression employees work for free?

 

[Mason66]

And they are - we are.

Why isn't it good enough?

What more could our children and grandchildren WANT out of life?

My kid has everything he could want. I told him last Thursday that was his biggest problem.

 

[Mason66]

Well, a wealthier America can provide an end to homelessness. It can mean that a person won't have to wait months for receive medical treatment. It can mean fewer people who have to worry whether they will be able to pay their rent, or pay their morgage, or keep their job. It means fewer college graduates who can't find work. It can mean that many parents won't have to work full time jobs to support their children and can spend more time with their families.

Where inthe world do people work part time Jobs top feed their family?

 

[Mason66]

I am not looking for complete equality. I am only looking for more income equality like what we had in the 1950's and 1960's. Why don't we go back to that?

The numbers were lower but the difference was still there.

May I ask how old you are? Did you live as an adult through the '50s and '60s?

 

[Fisher]

When I started Reading your comment I thought you were going to say to outlaw those ítems so you don't know what anybody else has and you can be happy with what you do have.

That would work too.

Yep. Watch less Real House Wives and HGTV and more COPS. Nothing makes you feel like a complete success in life better than a COPS marathon.

 

[distraff]

Where inthe world do people work part time Jobs top feed their family?

Right now? Nowhere. In the future that might change.

The numbers were lower but the difference was still there.

May I ask how old you are? Did you live as an adult through the '50s and '60s?

There was definitely income inequality back then, and there was nothing wrong with that. The income inequality back then was at a healthier level and allowed more economic growth for more people.

 

[Mason66]

Income equality exists...and it always will.
See my post #34.

What is your solution? Everyone in america meet every friday night and divide all of our money with each other until everyone has the same amount?

All cars should cost the same...a ford and a ferrari?...no difference in price...All jobs should pay the same...a brain surgeon shouldn't make any more than a groundskeeper....A 1000 acre farm should cost no more than an efficiency apartment.....LMFAO...what nonsense you kids talk...

Everybody should drive a Trabant. It worked so well the last time.

 

[Neomalthusian]

Actually the majority of max cuts for the rich have happened under Republican presidents.

Tax cuts for the rich happened under:
W. Bush (R)
Reagan (R)
Kennedy (D)
Coolidge (R)
Harding (R)

Tax Hiked for the rich happened under:
Wilson (D)
FDR (D)
Bush Senior (R)
Obama (D)

I won't even dispute any of that, but I'll give you twenty bucks and a back-scratch if you would simply answer the questions I posed, rather than dodge them. Please?

Who am I asking about in questions 1-4 above?

Keep in mind, the capital gains tax is a BIGGIE! Equity-based compensation has taken off, really exploded, and it's how the mega-rich are getting paid, and they're paying a lower effective tax rate thanks to this capital gains tax that was cut under Clinton and his treasury secretary ___________, who is also a top contender for the next head of the Federal Reserve.

Will you dodge again or will you share with us who I'm talking about?

 

[P. Kersey]

Right now? Nowhere. In the future that might change.

When you get a minute I'd like to know your thoughts on the 2 questions I asked you in post#93.

 

[P. Kersey]

Everybody should drive a Trabant. It worked so well the last time.

Right you are, comrade.

 

[AngryOldGuy]

holy crap I seriously want one of those SO BAD!

 

[Mason66]

That probably tends to be true. I have spoken to a number of millionaires and almost across the board I recognized them as very sharp. What I would add to this characterization though is that they took gutsy chances, i.e. they "went for it." They didn't shy away from medicine, law, finance, entrepreneurship and other career choices that tend to create millionaires. They went after things that are difficult and (probably) have a relatively high failure rate, but they went for it anyway and succeeded, alas, they are now successful.

Some will read your comment (in bold) and get offended because it implies the less successful "don't work hard" or are dumb and lazy. By measuring people only against the very very successful, everyone looks that way, but not everyone is actually that way. Some people choose career tracks and lifestyles according to their personalities and are less rich because of their personal choices.

Don't forget their work ethic. If they sat around all day, they woudln't have achieved anything.

 

[TiredOfLife]

Everybody should drive a Trabant. It worked so well the last time.

Marx warned them but they jumped the shark. Capitalism, then Socialism, then Communism. It's a progression from selfish to decent to noble. Since these are humans we are talking about, you can forget the last one.

 

[distraff]

I think you're tilting at windmills ( you understand that reference?) and there is no "one size fits all" solution.
Now answer my questions.

Specifically who is going to decide what "hurts the u.s. economy?

What specifically is the definition of "hurts the u.s. economy"?[/QUOTE]

Unfortunately, that would have to be lawmakers who are getting advice from economists. That is the best system we have, it certainly is not perfect. Again, I ask you, is our high income inequality harmful?

 

[Mason66]

I would be fine if things were just like that. However things have gotten to an extreme. Wealth inequality is climbing. The bottom 80% have less than 1/8 the financial wealth of the top 1%. Economic mobility in the US is falling and is now lower than that of Europe. 80% of income growth goes to the top 1%. Because of this, median incomes have stagnated.

I am fine with people keeping the fruits of their own labor as long as it does not harm the US economy. We need to find a solution to this problem.

This is an interesting statement.

How could it hurt the economy if people keep what they earn?

 

[Mason66]

All of it. No holding out. We want everyone to be exactly equal, ya know. :roll:

But but I have pennies in one of my cars armrests that have been there for 40 years.

I don't want to give them up.

Nobody will know if I fudge a Little bit.

 

[Mason66]

Right now? Nowhere. In the future that might change.



There was definitely income inequality back then, and there was nothing wrong with that. The income inequality back then was at a healthier level and allowed more economic growth for more people.

The difference is that people were happy with what they had and the father was happy with what he could provide for the family.

Now enough is never enough.

 

[TiredOfLife]

But but I have pennies in one of my cars armrests that have been there for 40 years.

I don't want to give them up.

Nobody will know if I fudge a Little bit.

The penny, a perfect example of the US wasting time and money on something that should have long ago been gotten rid of.

 

[TiredOfLife]

The difference is that people were happy with what they had and the father was happy with what he could provide for the family.

Now enough is never enough.

People are happy when they have a bit more than the guy next door. It's been studied and shown to be true. Humans, what a bunch of jerks.

 

[Mason66]

holy crap I seriously want one of those SO BAD!

A similar car came to the US in 1986. It was called a Hyundai.

They had a defroster on the back window to warm your hands when you were pushing it.

 

[P. Kersey]

Unfortunately, that would have to be lawmakers who are getting advice from economists.

Economists? Right...they know so much..ask any 10 of them the same question and you'll get 10 different answers....government? Yeah...that'll work. We need more government interference....We're doing so well now because of the government...and you want to give them MORE power?

I want somebody to suggest to me a single, government run program that isn't a bloated, mismanaged, intransient, rapacious abuser of tax dollars.
We live in an age now where cutting the rate of growth in spending is considered a dastardly cut. In business, we know that controlling costs is a mandatory element of survival. This element is non-existent in government.

That is the best system we have, it certainly is not perfect. Again, I ask you, is our high income inequality harmful?

No..It's how the world works. Always has and always will. Is it "fair"? LMAO...."Fair" is where you take your kids to ride the roller coaster. Life isn't "fair" and no amount of government intrusion, laws or tampering can change that.

 

[distraff]

The difference is that people were happy with what they had and the father was happy with what he could provide for the family.

Now enough is never enough.

People back then were not happy with what they had. They complained when growth was slow just like we do now. What we have now is not good. Many Americans are struggling just to get by. Costs are rising but incomes are not. For many Americans, what we have now is not working for them.