• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

WHY IS INCOME INEQUALITY RISING?

Lafayette

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 13, 2015
Messages
9,594
Reaction score
2,072
Location
France
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
Unfortunately, I don't see any of these issues being substantively addressed under Biden, even if we were to take the House and Senate, though I very much hope to be wrong.

A frank lesson about American political-judgement was just shown in this last presidential election. Nearly half the voters voted for a Mentally Sick Billionaire who thinks the election was manipulated against him and that he need only wait four more years to get reelected.

The most dangerous problem in the US is -and has been for quite some time - its Acute Income Disparity. And we blithely elect millionaires to run the country:
Inequality-has-increased-more-rapidly-in-the-U.S.-than-Europe.png


Such is our endemic National Delusion:
*That the acquisition of millions if not billions of dollars by a very tiny percentage of the Total Population is both correct and natural.
*And that distribution of Income is of no real consequence to the well-being of the nation as a whole.

Both of the above are sophomoric attitudes. Both are momentous self-delusions of a country unwilling to consider the dangerous economic-path it has decided to follow ...

The answer to the question posed in the tittle is amply considered and answered in this OECD pdf-document here. It's a very long but interesting read.

PS: Let's not forget. It was Communism that taught us "equality of Income" was NOT the right solution. But we still need to learn that Excessive Accumulation of Wealth is NOT either the best outcome!
 
A frank lesson about American political-judgement was just shown in this last presidential election. Nearly half the voters voted for a Mentally Sick Billionaire who thinks the election was manipulated against him and that he need only wait four more years to get reelected.

The most dangerous problem in the US is -and has been for quite some time - its Acute Income Disparity. And we blithely elect millionaires to run the country:
Inequality-has-increased-more-rapidly-in-the-U.S.-than-Europe.png


Such is our endemic National Delusion:
*That the acquisition of millions if not billions of dollars by a very tiny percentage of the Total Population is both correct and natural.
*And that distribution of Income is of no real consequence to the well-being of the nation as a whole.

Both of the above are sophomoric attitudes. Both are momentous self-delusions of a country unwilling to consider the dangerous economic-path it has decided to follow ...

The answer to the question posed in the tittle is amply considered and answered in this OECD pdf-document here. It's a very long but interesting read.

PS: Let's not forget. It was Communism that taught us "equality of Income" was NOT the right solution. But we still need to learn that Excessive Accumulation of Wealth is NOT either the best outcome!


Newsflash: Rich people will always get richer, no matter the country.

I'm more interested in the U.S. standard of living. The "poor" people in our country are doing quite well compared to much of the word. With a higher than average salary within the largest economy in the world, access to goods and services has never been more attainable. The citizens of the U.S. have wants but very few needs.
 
It's "soshalizm" to even talk about this.
 
What we need to do is to give all of the money to the five old richest guys. All of it. Even the Tooth Fairy's nickels. Only then can we trip the gate on trickle down and experience true prosperity.
 
What we need to do is to give all of the money to the five old richest guys. All of it. Even the Tooth Fairy's nickels. Only then can we trip the gate on trickle down and experience true prosperity.
That's the way Trump went when he signed his tax cut, just like Bush and look how He and the Republicans have acted besides.
 
That's the way Trump went when he signed his tax cut, just like Bush and look how He and the Republicans have acted besides.

They didn't take it far enough. They are obviously at least a little susceptible to communism.
 
If income inequality is a bad thing, what's the desired outcome?
 
They didn't take it far enough. They are obviously at least a little susceptible to communism.
Who?

Everything's pretty cozy.

Let's see what they will do.
 
Because GOP policies, that's why.
 
Newsflash: Rich people will always get richer, no matter the country.
False, economic mobility shows wealth declines.

The overriding reason wealth inequality is increasing is due to neoliberal policies, primarily on taxation and inheritance.
 
What we need to do is to give all of the money to the five old richest guys. All of it. Even the Tooth Fairy's nickels. Only then can we trip the gate on trickle down and experience true prosperity.

 
If income inequality is a bad thing, what's the desired outcome?

WE need income inequality but we need the upper end to bleed money down to the lower end for a change.
 
False, economic mobility shows wealth declines.

The overriding reason wealth inequality is increasing is due to neoliberal policies, primarily on taxation and inheritance.

Lol. I imagined you in a beanie and sipping a Starbucks while trying to lecture the neighboring patron. You can "False" it all you like but the rich as a whole tend to find ways to make more.
 
Lol. I imagined you in a beanie and sipping a Starbucks while trying to lecture the neighboring patron. You can "False" it all you like but the rich as a whole tend to find ways to make more.
On the whole...is meaningless, especially AFTER your first comment was without caveats. There is a constant churning of who qualifies as "wealthy", and that still is not the point. The point of this thread is why the disparity is getting worse. You have already made it clear you don't want to participate in this debate....so why come back? Go off and start your thread about how the "poor" shouldn't complain, ignorant of why that causes continued wealth inequality.

****ing bag of hammers...
 
On the whole...is meaningless, especially AFTER your first comment was without caveats. There is a constant churning of who qualifies as "wealthy", and that still is not the point. The point of this thread is why the disparity is getting worse. You have already made it clear you don't want to participate in this debate....so why come back? Go off and start your thread about how the "poor" shouldn't complain, ignorant of why that causes continued wealth inequality.

****ing bag of hammers...
Lol again, I see you got a refill. The rich get richer, which you ascertain is false. I do not. I think the issue is you don't approve of the rich getting richer, I'm okay with it.

Income inequality will always exist. The second part of my first post was regarding standard of living, which no one seems to be interested in. The standard of living in the U.S. is very good no matter what metric of income inequality you apply. Keeping that in mind, why is income inequality such a bad thing? As another poster asked, what is the desired outcome you seek?
 
KEY IS THE FAIR DISTRIBUTION OF INCOME

one word, TRumpism
It was rising long before he arrived on the scene in LaLaLand on the Potomac.

What I try to point-out about wealth is this!
*Yes, it is wholly a key element of any economic system. People at all levels seek to enhance their wealth.
*But we have not learned how to control it. (Far too much of this "sky's the limit" BS is part of our "national identity".)
*The coverage of wealth in America is nearly always exaggerated for effect. It sells newspapers. But it need not be the Ultimate Objective of a Fair Nation. American needs a better distribution of Income! And we get that by undoing the dive-downwards in Upper-income Taxation that began with Reckless Ronnie!

Wealth is the opposite of Poverty. And it is a nation's duty to elaborate solutions that manage BOTH ENDS - because the middle will handle itself!

The two inadmissible exaggerations in any Fair Democracy are (1) Too much income going to too few, and (2) Too little income going to too many.

The economic-measures to manage both of those extremes are well-known. But, we must elect the right-people. That is, those who know how to manage Both Ends of the economic-distribution of income. Yes, aint it shame that such has to be managed? Because when it isn't then matters get out-of-hand.

Thus the Distribution of Income - done by means of taxation and reinvestment in the economy - is "the way out" to manage a country fairly and effectively. Howzzat?

Nothing all that special:
*Manage the spread of Income by means of taxation to assure either end (Top/Bottom) are not lopsided in financial weight and numbers. It's the Middle-class that should be the largest section of the distribution.
*Assure that we have sufficient competence in (and easy-access too) Tertiary-level Education. Such that the job-market has no problem assigning talent to where it is needed. Meaning that it must be low-cost to students in families at at the bottom, which will be an increasing necessity as we shift from the Industrial Age to the Internet Age. (Better yet, have it low-cost to everybody who seeks a post-secondary level degree. Which is a prime-investment in the future of any nation.)
*
And in order to succeed at the above, the government MUST CHANGE THE WAY IT FUNDS EDUCATION. At present, more than half of America's Discretionary Spending goes to only one agency. The DoD! (See here
National Spending Pie Chart.) Post-secondary education is NOT getting the money it needs. The average annual tuition-expenditure at a state-school is $14K a year. Which excludes completely those below the Poverty Threshold of $25K a year for a family of four! And which means they need free-entry!

But as a nation, we are not anywhere near obtaining all three above objectives ... !
 
Lol again, I see you got a refill.
Wrong, I don't go to SB, they are overpriced...and well...covid...but go on with the stupidity...
The rich get richer, which you ascertain is false.
I did not say that, you are incapable of restating what i said.
I do not. I think the issue is you don't approve of the rich getting richer, I'm okay with it.
A false assumption, stupidly made by you....which is par for the course.

Income inequality will always exist.
This is proof of your ignorance of the subject, income inequality is about the distribution...the GAINS.....and as I already pointed out, 45-75, we had very equitable income gains.
The second part of my first post was regarding standard of living, which no one seems to be interested in.
Because it is NOT the subject....frigging duh.
 
Back
Top Bottom