Wealth Inequality in America

[QUOTE=Green_Shine;15235213]

Originally Posted by Rhumb

I really don't know what to say to this, you lose your point when you start rambling on about the GOP. I don't agree with you, I agree with hard work. Household incomes took a dip when Clinton left office with a recession, Bush bumped it up until the bubble burst in 08'. It has been on a steady decline under Obama ever since. How do you feel towards those with a household income in 9% or 3%...Or even people in the 200k -250K?

I agree with hard work too, as do most Americans, even most of the derided 47%. The trouble is that their hard work is reaping ever less reward, certainly ad compared to the very top tier. As I mentioned, worker productivity and hours worked are at very high levels, historic even. Sadly, this somehow seems for naught.

Is this then to imply that the 1% are suddenly working harder than they were 30 years ago, justifying their disproportionate swell of income and wealth? Perhaps, but I have yet to see any argument or data to attest to that.

Yes, incomes/wealth took a small dip after Clinton's term, after growing strongly AND broadly. During Bush's term, there was some broad based initial recovery, but for the majority of people, that flattened off to stagnant income growth and increases in overall wealth were the result of the ephemeral real estate bubble.

As we grimly know, that inevitably popped and even that wealth increase cratered, leaving the 90-some percenters in far worse economic position when Bush bid adieu than when he said hiya. This despite the supposed economic panacea of huge tax cuts disproportionately benefitting the well heeled.

Given the greater preeminence of conservative economic policy during the Bush years, how is it that we ended up in economic ruin surpassed but once in our nation's history? A collapse that far more ravaged the 99% percent than the 1% percent who, at the end of the day, emerged relatively unscathed at worst or even wealthier yet at best.

Many on the right basically seem to say shut up, buck up and work even harder, and v never mind that a few are hoarding in even huger slice of the pie. I'm not confident that message will carry over when most realize they're dining on the economic crumbs trickling down off a few silk tablecloths from on up high.

[QUOTE=Rhumb;15235673]

Originally Posted by Green_Shine

I agree with hard work too, as do most Americans, even most of the derided 47%. The trouble is that their hard work is reaping ever less reward, certainly ad compared to the very top tier. As I mentioned, worker productivity and hours worked are at very high levels, historic even. Sadly, this somehow seems for naught.

Is this then to imply that the 1% are suddenly working harder than they were 30 years ago, justifying their disproportionate swell of income and wealth? Perhaps, but I have yet to see any argument or data to attest to that.

Yes, incomes/wealth took a small dip after Clinton's term, after growing strongly AND broadly. During Bush's term, there was some broad based initial recovery, but for the majority of people, that flattened off to stagnant income growth and increases in overall wealth were the result of the ephemeral real estate bubble.

As we grimly know, that inevitably popped and even that wealth increase cratered, leaving the 90-some percenters in far worse economic position when Bush bid adieu than when he said hiya. This despite the supposed economic panacea of huge tax cuts disproportionately benefitting the well heeled.

Given the greater preeminence of conservative economic policy during the Bush years, how is it that we ended up in economic ruin surpassed but once in our nation's history? A collapse that far more ravaged the 99% percent than the 1% percent who, at the end of the day, emerged relatively unscathed at worst or even wealthier yet at best.

Many on the right basically seem to say shut up, buck up and work even harder, and v never mind that a few are hoarding in even huger slice of the pie. I'm not confident that message will carry over when most realize they're dining on the economic crumbs trickling down off a few silk tablecloths from on up high.

Originally Posted by rdsesq

I'll remind you of that the next time you b!tch and whine about the govt.

It's difficult to change an entire government individually. One has more control directly over their personal lives...job, salary, location, etc.

[QUOTE=Rhumb;15235673]

Originally Posted by Green_Shine

I agree with hard work too, as do most Americans, even most of the derided 47%. The trouble is that their hard work is reaping ever less reward, certainly ad compared to the very top tier. As I mentioned, worker productivity and hours worked are at very high levels, historic even. Sadly, this somehow seems for naught.

Is this then to imply that the 1% are suddenly working harder than they were 30 years ago, justifying their disproportionate swell of income and wealth? Perhaps, but I have yet to see any argument or data to attest to that.

Yes, incomes/wealth took a small dip after Clinton's term, after growing strongly AND broadly. During Bush's term, there was some broad based initial recovery, but for the majority of people, that flattened off to stagnant income growth and increases in overall wealth were the result of the ephemeral real estate bubble.

As we grimly know, that inevitably popped and even that wealth increase cratered, leaving the 90-some percenters in far worse economic position when Bush bid adieu than when he said hiya. This despite the supposed economic panacea of huge tax cuts disproportionately benefitting the well heeled.

Given the greater preeminence of conservative economic policy during the Bush years, how is it that we ended up in economic ruin surpassed but once in our nation's history? A collapse that far more ravaged the 99% percent than the 1% percent who, at the end of the day, emerged relatively unscathed at worst or even wealthier yet at best.

Many on the right basically seem to say shut up, buck up and work even harder, and v never mind that a few are hoarding in even huger slice of the pie. I'm not confident that message will carry over when most realize they're dining on the economic crumbs trickling down off a few silk tablecloths from on up high.

I know you want to believe the 1% is "old money" but reality is the growth to the 1% is attributed to having no set market value to entrepreneurship in times when globalization and e-business are taping into world markets. 30 years ago a small business stayed small, today that idea creates global fortune 500 companies which fuels America.

Regular 9-5 folks who carry job titles, are compensated by market value in a competitive market. So, yes people need to work hard and make themselves more valuable, breaking into the top 9% or even 3% of households is not a difficult feat.

Another thing, that lame video does not take into account retired baby boomers and debt to income ratio. The middle class and lower class will always be behind because they over consume, are in massive debt and do not give their money a chance to work for them.

People like yourself on the far left do a disservice to the very people you are trying to protect by making excuses and placing blame on everyone but that very person.

Originally Posted by Rhumb

So I imagine if they don't want to relegate themselves to permanent minority-party status, and the dimunition in power and influence that entails, perhaps they ought to rething and reformulate their policies, particularly economic, to be more broadly beneficial to the vast majority of Americans than has been the case. The broad economic policy trends of the past 20-30 years have been generally reflective of Republican/conservative thinking (supply-side, trickle down, low taxes, less regulation, etc.) and the results have generally been pretty pathetic for all but the very wealthist slivers of our society. American's aren't going to be economic chumps forever. I think the GOP/conservatives dismiss this and disparage the messengers/victims at their own long-term political risk.

People just want to be taken care of. For some people, that involves wanting hand-outs, they want what they didn't earn to be taken from other people and given to them. For others, it just means they want the system tilted in their favor, and they'll go earn what they can. For others it means they want the system to treat them fairly based on their own merits and accomplishments.

I cannot back this up with any kind of hard info. But it doesn't seem strange to me that when the economy is humming along and 401(k)s are growing by leaps and bounds and houses are appreciating 1% a week and people can strip the equity from it to buy Hummers and trips to Aruba, people want a free-market approach, lower taxes, less regulation, run around with our hair on fire and damn the torpedoes. Nobody really cares what the richest of the rich are earning because everyone's getting paid and we're all fat, dumb and happy. And we will support, sponsor and elect the politicians that beat that drum.

But when the economy tanks and people are laid off, all our financial chickens come home to roost and we have to pay the piper, we suddenly say the system is broken, capitalism sucks, make the rich pay for everything, make it all better with a lollipop at the end. And suddenly wealth disparity needs to be addressed, and those evil 1%ers are to blame for it all. And we will support, sponsor and elect the politicians that beat THAT drum.

It doesn't mean that one set of policitians is "right" or "wrong". It's more a matter of timing and patience and how successful they are with spinning their into something we'll buy.

We are only 4.5 years removed from Obama putting a whupping on McCain. Likewise we are also only 2.5 years removed from the "shellacking" the GOP delivered to the Dems in the midterm elections. We are now only 4 months removed from Obama defeating Romney by a much narrower margin.

I don't think it's much of a stretch to see what's happening as a combination of three things: 1) people want to be taken care of, 2) the Dems are generally more upfront about saying they're willing to take things away from a small % of people that have them and give those things to the large % of people that don't have them, and 3) if people don't see relatively quick tangible results, they'll give up on one idea and try another.

It's very fashionable at the moment to gather around the GOP's funeral pyre and watch for the dude with the match. But it wouldn't surprise me at all to see a swing back towards the GOP in the future, either because the economy recovers and we get back to our pre-recession mindset, or because the Dems don't really have the answer either and people get tired of waiting for them to "fix it".

Originally Posted by Xcelratr

People just want to be taken care of. For some people, that involves wanting hand-outs, they want what they didn't earn to be taken from other people and given to them. For others, it just means they want the system tilted in their favor, and they'll go earn what they can. For others it means they want the system to treat them fairly based on their own merits and accomplishments.

I cannot back this up with any kind of hard info. But it doesn't seem strange to me that when the economy is humming along and 401(k)s are growing by leaps and bounds and houses are appreciating 1% a week and people can strip the equity from it to buy Hummers and trips to Aruba, people want a free-market approach, lower taxes, less regulation, run around with our hair on fire and damn the torpedoes. Nobody really cares what the richest of the rich are earning because everyone's getting paid and we're all fat, dumb and happy. And we will support, sponsor and elect the politicians that beat that drum.

But when the economy tanks and people are laid off, all our financial chickens come home to roost and we have to pay the piper, we suddenly say the system is broken, capitalism sucks, make the rich pay for everything, make it all better with a lollipop at the end. And suddenly wealth disparity needs to be addressed, and those evil 1%ers are to blame for it all. And we will support, sponsor and elect the politicians that beat THAT drum.

It doesn't mean that one set of policitians is "right" or "wrong". It's more a matter of timing and patience and how successful they are with spinning their into something we'll buy.

We are only 4.5 years removed from Obama putting a whupping on McCain. Likewise we are also only 2.5 years removed from the "shellacking" the GOP delivered to the Dems in the midterm elections. We are now only 4 months removed from Obama defeating Romney by a much narrower margin.

I don't think it's much of a stretch to see what's happening as a combination of three things: 1) people want to be taken care of, 2) the Dems are generally more upfront about saying they're willing to take things away from a small % of people that have them and give those things to the large % of people that don't have them, and 3) if people don't see relatively quick tangible results, they'll give up on one idea and try another.

It's very fashionable at the moment to gather around the GOP's funeral pyre and watch for the dude with the match. But it wouldn't surprise me at all to see a swing back towards the GOP in the future, either because the economy recovers and we get back to our pre-recession mindset, or because the Dems don't really have the answer either and people get tired of waiting for them to "fix it".

This country is a society of greedy consumers who want, want, want and don't appreciate what they have or what it takes to acquire wealth and luxuries in life. It's a shame.

How's that M3 Rhumb?

Originally Posted by bimmerfan08

This country is a society of greedy consumers who want, want, want and don't appreciate what they have or what it takes to acquire wealth and luxuries in life. It's a shame.

How's that M3 Rhumb?

blanket statement is blanket.

Originally Posted by MDydinanM

blanket statement is blanket.

It's like calling the kettle black.

Let's talk about politician's pensions shall we?

Originally Posted by MDydinanM

blanket statement is blanket.

Blanket statements are tossed over the bed by people looking from this issue from every angle and level.

There are just as many "lazy poor people need to work harder" blanket statements as there are "corrupt rich bastards need to earn less money" blanket statements.

Trying to name the Broad Brush Award winner doesn't do this discussion any good.

Originally Posted by Xcelratr

Trying to name the Broad Brush Award winner doesn't do this discussion any good.

That may be, but shouldn't our comments be as accurate and precise to the extent possible? As good practice? Especially with the back and forth dialogue trying to point and counter point each other?

I skimmed a couple posts and jumped straight to the end. So I apologize if my post makes zero sense.




I think a lot of life's little problems would cease to exist if people learned the difference between necessity and luxury.

Originally Posted by casino is no lie

I skimmed a couple threads and jumped straight to the end. So I apologize if my post makes zero sense.




I think a lot of life's little problems would cease to exist if people learned the difference between necessity and luxury.

That's a fair statement.

Originally Posted by casino is no lie

I skimmed a couple threads and jumped straight to the end. So I apologize if my post makes zero sense.




I think a lot of life's little problems would cease to exist if people learned the difference between necessity and luxury.

Broadcast that to America. Most Americans probably assume luxuries are necessities in this consumer based society we reside in.

Originally Posted by bimmerfan08

This country is a society of greedy consumers who want, want, want and don't appreciate what they have or what it takes to acquire wealth and luxuries in life. It's a shame.

How's that M3 Rhumb?

Wasn't this essentially Romney's election platform, as encapsulated in his 47% revelation? Didn't work so well in 2012, can't understand why clinging to it will work any better in the future. Of course, if the Republicans fell compelled to double-down on this idealogy and strategy, I'm sure the Democrats would be overjoyed.

Personally, I have a much less disdainful opinion of our country and its citizens, that most are in fact hard working -- among the hardest working, most productive workers in the world -- and are neither greedy or covetuous but rather, simply want a fair recompense on their hard work and efforts in the first place, not to take or "redistribute" wealth after the fact. I'm sure they do appreciate what they have, probably better than those who have a lot more, but aren't content then to ignore inequities, unfairness and unjustness in our economic system.

It is a shame that some have such a low opinion of so many of our fellow, hard working Americans.

Oh, the used, six-year-old M3 I finally bought after selling my 12-year-old also-purchased-used-car, and the beater ex-girlfriend's used Subaru before that, with money from living rather modestly and prudently? Working just fine which is good as I intend to keep it for quite some time, that being the pragmatic, sensible and economical thing to do.

Originally Posted by Rhumb

Wasn't this essentially Romney's election platform, as encapsulated in his 47% revelation? Didn't work so well in 2012, can't understand why clinging to it will work any better in the future. Of course, if the Republicans fell compelled to double-down on this idealogy and strategy, I'm sure the Democrats would be overjoyed.

Personally, I have a much less disdainful opinion of our country and its citizens, that most are in fact hard working -- among the hardest working, most productive workers in the world -- and are neither greedy or covetuous but rather, simply want a fair recompense on their hard work and efforts in the first place, not to take or "redistribute" wealth after the fact. I'm sure they do appreciate what they have, probably better than those who have a lot more, but aren't content then to ignore inequities, unfairness and unjustness in our economic system.

It is a shame that some have such a low opinion of so many of our fellow, hard working Americans.

Oh, the used, six-year-old M3 I finally bought after selling my 12-year-old also-purchased-used-car, and the beater ex-girlfriend's used Subaru before that, with money from living rather modestly and prudently? Working just fine which is good as I intend to keep it for quite some time, that being the pragmatic, sensible and economical thing to do.

You are an excellent example of a prudent, conservative, living-within-reasonable-means American.

If the entire country acted in a similar fashion, we'd have a stable, albeit less exciting, economy.

However, look at the number of very expensive new cars sold every year (347,000 BMWs/MINIs alone), the big screen TVs, the 4 bedroom houses, the Rolex watches, the zillion copies of People magazine, the JetSkis, the trips to Aruba, FleshLights, the # of kegs of booze and packs of cigarettes, subscriptions to porn sites, etc.

These evil 1%ers aren't the ones buying all that stuff. Such volume can only be supported by these hard working, most productive workers that are neither greedy or covetous according to your description.

It's hard to reconcile the image you paint of what American workers want with your disdain for the way bimmerfan08 described the great masses given the facts of how we spend our money.

Originally Posted by Xcelratr

You are an excellent example of a prudent, conservative, living-within-reasonable-means American.

If the entire country acted in a similar fashion, we'd have a stable, albeit less exciting, economy.

However, look at the number of very expensive new cars sold every year (347,000 BMWs/MINIs alone), the big screen TVs, the 4 bedroom houses, the Rolex watches, the zillion copies of People magazine, the JetSkis, the trips to Aruba, FleshLights, the # of kegs of booze and packs of cigarettes, subscriptions to porn sites, etc.

These evil 1%ers aren't the ones buying all that stuff. Such volume can only be supported by these hard working, most productive workers that are neither greedy or covetous according to your description.

It's hard to reconcile the image you paint of what American workers want with your disdain for the way bimmerfan08 described the great masses given the facts of how we spend our money.

Nice references for unneeded goods.

Originally Posted by Rhumb

Wasn't this essentially Romney's election platform, as encapsulated in his 47% revelation? Didn't work so well in 2012, can't understand why clinging to it will work any better in the future. Of course, if the Republicans fell compelled to double-down on this idealogy and strategy, I'm sure the Democrats would be overjoyed.

Personally, I have a much less disdainful opinion of our country and its citizens, that most are in fact hard working -- among the hardest working, most productive workers in the world -- and are neither greedy or covetuous but rather, simply want a fair recompense on their hard work and efforts in the first place, not to take or "redistribute" wealth after the fact. I'm sure they do appreciate what they have, probably better than those who have a lot more, but aren't content then to ignore inequities, unfairness and unjustness in our economic system.

It is a shame that some have such a low opinion of so many of our fellow, hard working Americans.

Oh, the used, six-year-old M3 I finally bought after selling my 12-year-old also-purchased-used-car, and the beater ex-girlfriend's used Subaru before that, with money from living rather modestly and prudently? Working just fine which is good as I intend to keep it for quite some time, that being the pragmatic, sensible and economical thing to do.

That's what it is...opinion.

to not buying new cars and maintaining a used car. I have the same mentality. You sound like a conservative to me.

FTR the fact that Romney lost doesn't invalidate his 47% comment, if anything it supports it

Originally Posted by Act of God

FTR the fact that Romney lost doesn't invalidate his 47% comment, if anything it supports it

I'm still baffled that people think his 47% comment had any sort of basis in reality.

Originally Posted by casino is no lie

I skimmed a couple posts and jumped straight to the end. So I apologize if my post makes zero sense.




I think a lot of life's little problems would cease to exist if people learned the difference between necessity and luxury.

Sums up the whole thread.

Originally Posted by evolved

I'm still baffled that people think his 47% comment had any sort of basis in reality.

I completely agree with the 47% of the entire population being a mix of die hard leftists and goverment t1t suckers. You kidding me?