6 Ways Income Inequality Makes Your Life Worse

[Avatar4321]

Stress has no effect on our bodies is your opinion?

You seriously think the Rich don't get stressed?

You seriously think making the rich poor isn't going to stress more people out?

Ok so stress does have an effect on the body then? Or no? Or will you choose both?

Of course stress has an effect on the body. But I don't live in your fantasy world where poor people stress but rich people dont.

 

[ClosedCaption]

You seriously think the Rich don't get stressed?

You seriously think making the rich poor isn't going to stress more people out?

Ok so stress does have an effect on the body then? Or no? Or will you choose both?

Of course stress has an effect on the body. But I don't live in your fantasy world where poor people stress but rich people dont.

So stress can make you sick like I said. Why do you always do this? Ask a question like you dont understand. Agree with my response then disagree with the straw man you just made. Who (other than you) said that one side stresses and the other doesnt?

 

[NYcarbineer]

The far left logic is incapable of seeing anything beyond the talking points and propaganda.

Your posts have gotten even funnier since I saw your picture.

OMG

 

[ClosedCaption]

1. Income inequality forces Americans into debt.​

As the wealthy become wealthier, they create an “economic arms race in which the middle class has been spending beyond their means in order to keep up,” a 2013 study from the University of Chicago’s Marianne Bertrand and Adair Morse concludes.
“What you think you need depends on the context you find yourself in,” says Cornell economist Robert H. Frank, who has written about the “expenditure cascades.” “And standards tend to be local. When most of the income gains are going to the very top, the people around them feel relatively poorer and spend more because of that.” Lower- and middle-income Americans, in other words, are not forced to buy expensive cares or houses, but they feel pressured to do so, leading to an increase in the personal bankruptcy rate and a plummeting savings rate.

The wealthy bid up the the prices of real estate, create a boom in more expensive restaurants, bars, and grocery stores, and effectively price out their lower-income neighbors or force them to spend more to continue living in the community.

?Trickle-down consumption?: How rising inequality can leave everyone worse off

2. Income inequality makes America sick.​

Researchers at Harvard University’s School of Public Health found that women living in areas with large gaps between the “haves” and “have-nots” are at greater risk of being depressed and are nearly twice as likely to suffer from depression compared to the women living in areas that have a more equal income distribution.
Meanwhile, though American life expectancy has increased dramatically over past decades, research shows that those gains are going mostly to people at the upper end of the income ladder. Life expectancy of male workers retiring at 65 has grown by six years in the top half of the income distribution but only 1.3 years in the bottom half over the last 30 years, for instance. “Life expectancy has increased mainly among the privileged class,” Economic Policy Institute economist Monique Morrissey told the Washington Post. “For many people, raising the retirement age would amount to a significant benefit cut.”
The lack of health care providers in poorer communities and lack of education about health care conditions means that lower-income Americans are much more likely to develop and live with chronic medical conditions like diabetes or high blood pressure. A study by the National Urban League Policy estimates that U.S. health care disparities have contributed to $59.9 billion in excess spending, a price tag that will fall significantly as lower-income Americans start accessing health care services through the Affordable Care Act’s Medicaid expansion.

How The United States' Growing Income Inequality Is Hurting Women's Mental Health | ThinkProgress

3. Income inequality makes America less safe.​

Statistical patterns show that crime rates increase with rising economic inequality. For instance, a 1999 Harvard analysis of the homicide rates in each state and the District of Columbia found that as the gap between the rich and the poor rose, the rate of homicide rose along with it. Income inequality alone accounted for “74 percent of the variance in murder rates and half of the aggravated assaults,” the research concluded. A 2002 World Bank study confirmed these results, concluding that homicide and an unequal distribution of resources are inextricably tied throughout the world.
The National Bureau of Economic Research has developed an even more precise number, reporting that “a twenty percent drop in wages leads to a 12 to 18 percent increase in youth crime.” Other analysis has found that a 1 percentage point increase in the Gini index (a measure of wealth inequality) produces, on average, a 3.6 percent increase in the homicide rate.

ftp://psyftp.mcmaster.ca/dalywilson/sshrc2004/wilkinsonCrime.pdf

4. Income inequality makes America less democratic.​

A large body of research suggests that high inequality leads to lower levels of representative democracy and a higher probability of revolution, as poorer citizens become convinced that the government is only serving and representing the interests of the rich. And today’s political candidates and parties are relying more on deep pocketed campaign donors than at any other time since the early 1970s, when Congress first enacted campaign finance laws.
The Huffington Post’s Paul Blumenthal recently pointed out that “the top 0.01 percent of campaign donors — one percent of the one percent — contributed more than 40 percent of all the money spent in the 2012 elections.” Compare that to 1980, when the top 0.01 percent of campaign donors accounted for just under 15 percent of all the political contributions. Today’s rich also donate millions to Political Action Committees (PACs) and so-called 501(c)4 organizations in an effort to influence the politics and public policy. The Washington Post reported this month that the 17 groups that are funded by conservative donors Charles and David Koch “raised at least $407 million during the 2012 campaign” — more than Democrats and Republicans spent in the entire 2000 election.
Harvard economics professor Edward L. Glaeser argues that as the rich become richer and secure more political influence, they support policies that make them wealthier at the expense of everyone else. “If the rich can influence political outcomes through lobbying activities or membership in special interest groups, then more inequality could lead to less redistribution rather than more,” he explained in a 2006 paper.

http://www.economics.cornell.edu/et17/Erik Thorbecke files/Socioeconomic impact.pdf
How The 0.01 Percent Underwrites, And Undermines, Politics

5. Income inequality undermines the American dream.

​

New research finds that while economic mobility in the United States has stayed flat for two decades, the distance between the richest Americans and the poorest has grown dramatically. So if social mobility is a ladder, this means “the rungs of the ladder have grown further apart (inequality has increased), but children’s chances of climbing from lower to higher rungs have not changed,” the researchers note.
This intergenerational mobility is significantly lower in the United States than in most other developed countries. The chances of a child moving out of poverty are about half as high in the U.S. as in Denmark, for instance, leading Richard Wilkinson, Professor Emeritus of Social Epidemiology at England’s University of Nottingham, to conclude, “If Americans want to live the American dream, they should go to Denmark.”
Other research has found that economic mobility depends heavily on geography, and in particular, that areas with strong middle classes have higher rates. Places with lower and less progressive state income taxes, on the other hand, have lower rates of mobility.

Equality of Opportunity

6. Income inequality is undermining long-term economic growth.​

Societies with greater income inequality experience slower and less stable economic growth, a recent global comparison from the International Monetary Fund concluded, and see far shorter economic expansions.
They “are more vulnerable to both financial crises and political instability” and, if hit by external shocks, “often stumble into gridlock rather than agree to tough policies needed to keep growth alive,” the report found. As a result, American income trends suggest that current economic expansions “could last just one-third as long as in the late 1960s.”

How Inequality Hurts the Economy - Businessweek

All sorts of correlation not equaling causation happening here.

Dude you are one hell of a speed reader.

 

[Edgetho]

You seriously think the Rich don't get stressed?

You seriously think making the rich poor isn't going to stress more people out?

Ok so stress does have an effect on the body then? Or no? Or will you choose both?

Of course stress has an effect on the body. But I don't live in your fantasy world where poor people stress but rich people dont.

Wish I could give you more pos rep points, but I just used them on your prior post.

You're on fire today.

I guess it's stressful sitting under a tree, chewing on a straw and sipping wine.

But worrying about employees and debts and the IRS isn't

 

[HenryBHough]

OK, so government mandates income equality. Enforces it by working an average income then confiscating everything above the average and giving it to those whose incomes are below the average.

That puts some of the formerly below average above average at which time their excess is confiscated and given to those currently below average.

Those little dogs have little fleas upon their backs to bite them. The little fleas have little fleas and on ad infinitum.

Of course at some point - before total collapse - those who have been working hard to have a little something figure out they don't have to expend any effort since government will rape them of anything they earned "extra" and, hey, what's the point of doing anything because there's no need - government will provide, taking from others.

Until there are no others.

Believe otherwise? Then odds are good you're already feeding at the government trough but haven't quite figured out why the slop doesn't taste quite as good today as it did last week.

 

[Edgetho]

1. Income inequality forces Americans into debt.​

As the wealthy become wealthier, they create an “economic arms race in which the middle class has been spending beyond their means in order to keep up,” a 2013 study from the University of Chicago’s Marianne Bertrand and Adair Morse concludes.
“What you think you need depends on the context you find yourself in,” says Cornell economist Robert H. Frank, who has written about the “expenditure cascades.” “And standards tend to be local. When most of the income gains are going to the very top, the people around them feel relatively poorer and spend more because of that.” Lower- and middle-income Americans, in other words, are not forced to buy expensive cares or houses, but they feel pressured to do so, leading to an increase in the personal bankruptcy rate and a plummeting savings rate.

The wealthy bid up the the prices of real estate, create a boom in more expensive restaurants, bars, and grocery stores, and effectively price out their lower-income neighbors or force them to spend more to continue living in the community.

?Trickle-down consumption?: How rising inequality can leave everyone worse off

2. Income inequality makes America sick.​

Researchers at Harvard University’s School of Public Health found that women living in areas with large gaps between the “haves” and “have-nots” are at greater risk of being depressed and are nearly twice as likely to suffer from depression compared to the women living in areas that have a more equal income distribution.
Meanwhile, though American life expectancy has increased dramatically over past decades, research shows that those gains are going mostly to people at the upper end of the income ladder. Life expectancy of male workers retiring at 65 has grown by six years in the top half of the income distribution but only 1.3 years in the bottom half over the last 30 years, for instance. “Life expectancy has increased mainly among the privileged class,” Economic Policy Institute economist Monique Morrissey told the Washington Post. “For many people, raising the retirement age would amount to a significant benefit cut.”
The lack of health care providers in poorer communities and lack of education about health care conditions means that lower-income Americans are much more likely to develop and live with chronic medical conditions like diabetes or high blood pressure. A study by the National Urban League Policy estimates that U.S. health care disparities have contributed to $59.9 billion in excess spending, a price tag that will fall significantly as lower-income Americans start accessing health care services through the Affordable Care Act’s Medicaid expansion.

How The United States' Growing Income Inequality Is Hurting Women's Mental Health | ThinkProgress

3. Income inequality makes America less safe.​

Statistical patterns show that crime rates increase with rising economic inequality. For instance, a 1999 Harvard analysis of the homicide rates in each state and the District of Columbia found that as the gap between the rich and the poor rose, the rate of homicide rose along with it. Income inequality alone accounted for “74 percent of the variance in murder rates and half of the aggravated assaults,” the research concluded. A 2002 World Bank study confirmed these results, concluding that homicide and an unequal distribution of resources are inextricably tied throughout the world.
The National Bureau of Economic Research has developed an even more precise number, reporting that “a twenty percent drop in wages leads to a 12 to 18 percent increase in youth crime.” Other analysis has found that a 1 percentage point increase in the Gini index (a measure of wealth inequality) produces, on average, a 3.6 percent increase in the homicide rate.

ftp://psyftp.mcmaster.ca/dalywilson/sshrc2004/wilkinsonCrime.pdf

4. Income inequality makes America less democratic.​

A large body of research suggests that high inequality leads to lower levels of representative democracy and a higher probability of revolution, as poorer citizens become convinced that the government is only serving and representing the interests of the rich. And today’s political candidates and parties are relying more on deep pocketed campaign donors than at any other time since the early 1970s, when Congress first enacted campaign finance laws.
The Huffington Post’s Paul Blumenthal recently pointed out that “the top 0.01 percent of campaign donors — one percent of the one percent — contributed more than 40 percent of all the money spent in the 2012 elections.” Compare that to 1980, when the top 0.01 percent of campaign donors accounted for just under 15 percent of all the political contributions. Today’s rich also donate millions to Political Action Committees (PACs) and so-called 501(c)4 organizations in an effort to influence the politics and public policy. The Washington Post reported this month that the 17 groups that are funded by conservative donors Charles and David Koch “raised at least $407 million during the 2012 campaign” — more than Democrats and Republicans spent in the entire 2000 election.
Harvard economics professor Edward L. Glaeser argues that as the rich become richer and secure more political influence, they support policies that make them wealthier at the expense of everyone else. “If the rich can influence political outcomes through lobbying activities or membership in special interest groups, then more inequality could lead to less redistribution rather than more,” he explained in a 2006 paper.

http://www.economics.cornell.edu/et17/Erik Thorbecke files/Socioeconomic impact.pdf
How The 0.01 Percent Underwrites, And Undermines, Politics

5. Income inequality undermines the American dream.

​

New research finds that while economic mobility in the United States has stayed flat for two decades, the distance between the richest Americans and the poorest has grown dramatically. So if social mobility is a ladder, this means “the rungs of the ladder have grown further apart (inequality has increased), but children’s chances of climbing from lower to higher rungs have not changed,” the researchers note.
This intergenerational mobility is significantly lower in the United States than in most other developed countries. The chances of a child moving out of poverty are about half as high in the U.S. as in Denmark, for instance, leading Richard Wilkinson, Professor Emeritus of Social Epidemiology at England’s University of Nottingham, to conclude, “If Americans want to live the American dream, they should go to Denmark.”
Other research has found that economic mobility depends heavily on geography, and in particular, that areas with strong middle classes have higher rates. Places with lower and less progressive state income taxes, on the other hand, have lower rates of mobility.

Equality of Opportunity

6. Income inequality is undermining long-term economic growth.​

Societies with greater income inequality experience slower and less stable economic growth, a recent global comparison from the International Monetary Fund concluded, and see far shorter economic expansions.
They “are more vulnerable to both financial crises and political instability” and, if hit by external shocks, “often stumble into gridlock rather than agree to tough policies needed to keep growth alive,” the report found. As a result, American income trends suggest that current economic expansions “could last just one-third as long as in the late 1960s.”

How Inequality Hurts the Economy - Businessweek

All sorts of correlation not equaling causation happening here.

Dude you are one hell of a speed reader.

All we need to read is the poster's name and we know it's a pile of shit.

 

[healthmyths]

Do the rich get these services for free which the "people in poverty get for free.."

People in poverty in the USA get:
a) Free Cell phone (my cell phone I PAY is about $100/month)
if the poor person receives just one of the below FREE entitlements:
* Food stamps * Medicaid * Section 8 * Supplemental Security Income * National School Lunch Program

b) 40 million Americans on food stamps get $200/month in free food.

it cost $75.7 billion in 2011 compared to $35 billion in 2008; and enrollment has hit an all-time high of 46.7 million recipients. Meanwhile, the number of children receiving free school lunches has inflated from 18 to 21 million — an unprecedented jump —
about 2.1 million households (6 million) use Section 8 the Housing Choice Voucher program, pays a large

c) portion of the rents and utilities of or the Housing Choice Voucher Program up to $1,000 /month in FREE housing...

So these people get
=== $ 5,666 in EIC cash,
=== $12,000 free housing ,
=== $ 2,400 free food,
=== $ 1,200 in free cell phone plus
=== $ 5,000 a year in free health care from Medicaid.
So this is about $26,000 a year in FREE MONEY, free goods and free services...

Do any rich people get any of these services for free? If they do they are breaking the law!

 

[NYcarbineer]

Really, this goes along the lines of "Global warming could kill billions of people by 2014."

"Income inequality makes America sick"? HA! No, Obamacare makes America sick. Obamacare puts people into debt with it's high premiums. By stripping people of their insurance, it makes America less democratic. If you want to get technical, Obamacare makes life worse for America in many ways.

CC, stop drinking the toilet water.

And wha'ts your current income?

 

[The Rabbi]

Really, this goes along the lines of "Global warming could kill billions of people by 2014."

"Income inequality makes America sick"? HA! No, Obamacare makes America sick. Obamacare puts people into debt with it's high premiums. By stripping people of their insurance, it makes America less democratic. If you want to get technical, Obamacare makes life worse for America in many ways.

CC, stop drinking the toilet water.

And wha'ts your current income?

More than yours.

 

[francoHFW]

2. THE TOP 10% GET A LARGER SHARE.Share of National Income going to Top 10%:1950 = 35%1960 = 34%1970 = 34%1980 = 34% – Reagan1990 = 40%2000 = 47%2007 = 50% TO MAKE UP FOR THE LOSS.Household Debt as percentage of GDP:1965 = 46%1970 = 45%1980 = 50% – Reagan1990 = 61%2000 = 69%2007 = 95% An increase of 16% since Reagan.

3. WORKERS COMPENSATED FOR THE LOSS OF INCOME BY SPENDING THEIR SAVINGS.The savings Rose up to Reagan and fell during and after.1950 = 6.0%1960 = 7.0%1970 = 8.5%1980 = 10.0% – Reagan1982 = 11.2% – Peak1990 = 7.0%2000 = 2.0%2006 = -1.1% (Negative = withdrawing from savings)

4. Household Debt as percentage of GDP:1965 = 46%1970 = 45%1980 = 50% – Reagan1990 = 61%2000 = 69%2007 = 95%A 45% increase after 1980.

5. SO THE GAP BETWEEN THE RICHEST AND THE POOREST HAS GROWN.Gap Between the Share of Capital Income earned by the top 1%and the bottom 80%:1980 = 10%2003 = 56%A 5.6 times increase.

6. AND THE AMERICAN DREAM IS GONE.The Probabilityy of Moving Up from the Bottom 40% to the Top 40%:1945 = 12%1958 = 6%1990 = 3%2000 = 2%A 10% Decrease.Links:1 = ftp://ftp.bls.gov/pub/special.requests/pf/totalf1.txt1 = https://www.clevelandfed.org/Researc...s/No7Nov04.pdf1 = Clipboard01.jpg (image)2 – Congratulations to Emmanuel Saez | The White House3 = http://www.demos.org/inequality/imag...ving_thumb.gif3 = http://www.bea.gov/national/nipaweb/...&LastYear=20104 = http://www.prudentbear.com/index.php...or-debt-of-gdp4 = FRB: Z.1 Release--Financial Accounts of the United States--June 6, 20135/6 =
Wealth And Inequality In America - Business Insiderhttp://factleft.com/2011/03/28/the-demise-of-the-american-middle-class-in-numbers/

Reaganism has ruined America- Thank god for flag waving, bible thumping, chickenhawk bs propaganda for the ugly American hater dupes. see sig para 1...

 

[NYcarbineer]

Do the rich get these services for free which the "people in poverty get for free.."

People in poverty in the USA get:
a) Free Cell phone (my cell phone I PAY is about $100/month)
if the poor person receives just one of the below FREE entitlements:
* Food stamps * Medicaid * Section 8 * Supplemental Security Income * National School Lunch Program

b) 40 million Americans on food stamps get $200/month in free food.

it cost $75.7 billion in 2011 compared to $35 billion in 2008; and enrollment has hit an all-time high of 46.7 million recipients. Meanwhile, the number of children receiving free school lunches has inflated from 18 to 21 million — an unprecedented jump —
about 2.1 million households (6 million) use Section 8 the Housing Choice Voucher program, pays a large

c) portion of the rents and utilities of or the Housing Choice Voucher Program up to $1,000 /month in FREE housing...

So these people get
=== $ 5,666 in EIC cash,
=== $12,000 free housing ,
=== $ 2,400 free food,
=== $ 1,200 in free cell phone plus
=== $ 5,000 a year in free health care from Medicaid.
So this is about $26,000 a year in FREE MONEY, free goods and free services...

Do any rich people get any of these services for free? If they do they are breaking the law!

And conservatives would take every nickel of that away from the poor, if they ever had the votes.

Then our poor people would be really poor, and conservatives would think they'd made America a better place.

That is how sick conservatism is.

 

[ClosedCaption]

All sorts of correlation not equaling causation happening here.

Dude you are one hell of a speed reader.

All we need to read is the poster's name and we know it's a pile of shit.

Dont want to hurt your head thinking too much. I get it.

genetic​

You judged something as either good or bad on the basis of where it comes from, or from whom it came.

Too bad you dont have anything more than that

 

[Defiant1]

1. Income inequality forces Americans into debt.​

As the wealthy become wealthier, they create an “economic arms race in which the middle class has been spending beyond their means in order to keep up,” a 2013 study from the University of Chicago’s Marianne Bertrand and Adair Morse concludes.
“What you think you need depends on the context you find yourself in,” says Cornell economist Robert H. Frank, who has written about the “expenditure cascades.” “And standards tend to be local. When most of the income gains are going to the very top, the people around them feel relatively poorer and spend more because of that.” Lower- and middle-income Americans, in other words, are not forced to buy expensive cares or houses, but they feel pressured to do so, leading to an increase in the personal bankruptcy rate and a plummeting savings rate.

The wealthy bid up the the prices of real estate, create a boom in more expensive restaurants, bars, and grocery stores, and effectively price out their lower-income neighbors or force them to spend more to continue living in the community.

?Trickle-down consumption?: How rising inequality can leave everyone worse off

2. Income inequality makes America sick.​

Researchers at Harvard University’s School of Public Health found that women living in areas with large gaps between the “haves” and “have-nots” are at greater risk of being depressed and are nearly twice as likely to suffer from depression compared to the women living in areas that have a more equal income distribution.
Meanwhile, though American life expectancy has increased dramatically over past decades, research shows that those gains are going mostly to people at the upper end of the income ladder. Life expectancy of male workers retiring at 65 has grown by six years in the top half of the income distribution but only 1.3 years in the bottom half over the last 30 years, for instance. “Life expectancy has increased mainly among the privileged class,” Economic Policy Institute economist Monique Morrissey told the Washington Post. “For many people, raising the retirement age would amount to a significant benefit cut.”
The lack of health care providers in poorer communities and lack of education about health care conditions means that lower-income Americans are much more likely to develop and live with chronic medical conditions like diabetes or high blood pressure. A study by the National Urban League Policy estimates that U.S. health care disparities have contributed to $59.9 billion in excess spending, a price tag that will fall significantly as lower-income Americans start accessing health care services through the Affordable Care Act’s Medicaid expansion.

How The United States' Growing Income Inequality Is Hurting Women's Mental Health | ThinkProgress

3. Income inequality makes America less safe.​

Statistical patterns show that crime rates increase with rising economic inequality. For instance, a 1999 Harvard analysis of the homicide rates in each state and the District of Columbia found that as the gap between the rich and the poor rose, the rate of homicide rose along with it. Income inequality alone accounted for “74 percent of the variance in murder rates and half of the aggravated assaults,” the research concluded. A 2002 World Bank study confirmed these results, concluding that homicide and an unequal distribution of resources are inextricably tied throughout the world.
The National Bureau of Economic Research has developed an even more precise number, reporting that “a twenty percent drop in wages leads to a 12 to 18 percent increase in youth crime.” Other analysis has found that a 1 percentage point increase in the Gini index (a measure of wealth inequality) produces, on average, a 3.6 percent increase in the homicide rate.

ftp://psyftp.mcmaster.ca/dalywilson/sshrc2004/wilkinsonCrime.pdf

4. Income inequality makes America less democratic.​

A large body of research suggests that high inequality leads to lower levels of representative democracy and a higher probability of revolution, as poorer citizens become convinced that the government is only serving and representing the interests of the rich. And today’s political candidates and parties are relying more on deep pocketed campaign donors than at any other time since the early 1970s, when Congress first enacted campaign finance laws.
The Huffington Post’s Paul Blumenthal recently pointed out that “the top 0.01 percent of campaign donors — one percent of the one percent — contributed more than 40 percent of all the money spent in the 2012 elections.” Compare that to 1980, when the top 0.01 percent of campaign donors accounted for just under 15 percent of all the political contributions. Today’s rich also donate millions to Political Action Committees (PACs) and so-called 501(c)4 organizations in an effort to influence the politics and public policy. The Washington Post reported this month that the 17 groups that are funded by conservative donors Charles and David Koch “raised at least $407 million during the 2012 campaign” — more than Democrats and Republicans spent in the entire 2000 election.
Harvard economics professor Edward L. Glaeser argues that as the rich become richer and secure more political influence, they support policies that make them wealthier at the expense of everyone else. “If the rich can influence political outcomes through lobbying activities or membership in special interest groups, then more inequality could lead to less redistribution rather than more,” he explained in a 2006 paper.

http://www.economics.cornell.edu/et17/Erik Thorbecke files/Socioeconomic impact.pdf
How The 0.01 Percent Underwrites, And Undermines, Politics

5. Income inequality undermines the American dream.

​

New research finds that while economic mobility in the United States has stayed flat for two decades, the distance between the richest Americans and the poorest has grown dramatically. So if social mobility is a ladder, this means “the rungs of the ladder have grown further apart (inequality has increased), but children’s chances of climbing from lower to higher rungs have not changed,” the researchers note.
This intergenerational mobility is significantly lower in the United States than in most other developed countries. The chances of a child moving out of poverty are about half as high in the U.S. as in Denmark, for instance, leading Richard Wilkinson, Professor Emeritus of Social Epidemiology at England’s University of Nottingham, to conclude, “If Americans want to live the American dream, they should go to Denmark.”
Other research has found that economic mobility depends heavily on geography, and in particular, that areas with strong middle classes have higher rates. Places with lower and less progressive state income taxes, on the other hand, have lower rates of mobility.

Equality of Opportunity

6. Income inequality is undermining long-term economic growth.​

Societies with greater income inequality experience slower and less stable economic growth, a recent global comparison from the International Monetary Fund concluded, and see far shorter economic expansions.
They “are more vulnerable to both financial crises and political instability” and, if hit by external shocks, “often stumble into gridlock rather than agree to tough policies needed to keep growth alive,” the report found. As a result, American income trends suggest that current economic expansions “could last just one-third as long as in the late 1960s.”

How Inequality Hurts the Economy - Businessweek

The title should be 6 excuses people who think they are victims can use to explain why they are failing in life.

 

[Edgetho]

Do the rich get these services for free which the "people in poverty get for free.."

People in poverty in the USA get:
a) Free Cell phone (my cell phone I PAY is about $100/month)
if the poor person receives just one of the below FREE entitlements:
* Food stamps * Medicaid * Section 8 * Supplemental Security Income * National School Lunch Program

b) 40 million Americans on food stamps get $200/month in free food.

it cost $75.7 billion in 2011 compared to $35 billion in 2008; and enrollment has hit an all-time high of 46.7 million recipients. Meanwhile, the number of children receiving free school lunches has inflated from 18 to 21 million — an unprecedented jump —
about 2.1 million households (6 million) use Section 8 the Housing Choice Voucher program, pays a large

c) portion of the rents and utilities of or the Housing Choice Voucher Program up to $1,000 /month in FREE housing...

So these people get
=== $ 5,666 in EIC cash,
=== $12,000 free housing ,
=== $ 2,400 free food,
=== $ 1,200 in free cell phone plus
=== $ 5,000 a year in free health care from Medicaid.
So this is about $26,000 a year in FREE MONEY, free goods and free services...

Do any rich people get any of these services for free? If they do they are breaking the law!

And conservatives would take every nickel of that away from the poor, if they ever had the votes.

Then our poor people would be really poor, and conservatives would think they'd made America a better place.

That is how sick conservatism is.

No, that's not nearly how sick we are.... I wouldn't piss in your face if your hair was on fire.

Now get back to stocking those shelves, boy

 

[ClosedCaption]

They havent touched ONE link. They saw the red cape and like an attack dog they went in.

Avatar was even applauded for knocking out his own strawman.

Now thats something...

 

[Defiant1]

We were plumbing a house in the "rich" part of town and my helper commented that the people who lived in this neighborhood must make lots of money. The Architect overheard him and replied, "No son, they don't make lots of money, they owe lots of money".

But if they didn't have the money, or borrow the money, you wouldn't be plumbing it.

It's all relative, most people don't own outright their own home, but they make enough to make the payments.

It creates jobs.

 

[Edgetho]

They havent touched ONE link. They saw the red cape and like an attack dog they went in.

Avatar was even applauded for knocking out his own strawman.

Now thats something...

 

[LordBrownTrout]

2. THE TOP 10% GET A LARGER SHARE.Share of National Income going to Top 10%:1950 = 35%1960 = 34%1970 = 34%1980 = 34% – Reagan1990 = 40%2000 = 47%2007 = 50% TO MAKE UP FOR THE LOSS.Household Debt as percentage of GDP:1965 = 46%1970 = 45%1980 = 50% – Reagan1990 = 61%2000 = 69%2007 = 95% An increase of 16% since Reagan.

3. WORKERS COMPENSATED FOR THE LOSS OF INCOME BY SPENDING THEIR SAVINGS.The savings Rose up to Reagan and fell during and after.1950 = 6.0%1960 = 7.0%1970 = 8.5%1980 = 10.0% – Reagan1982 = 11.2% – Peak1990 = 7.0%2000 = 2.0%2006 = -1.1% (Negative = withdrawing from savings)

4. Household Debt as percentage of GDP:1965 = 46%1970 = 45%1980 = 50% – Reagan1990 = 61%2000 = 69%2007 = 95%A 45% increase after 1980.

5. SO THE GAP BETWEEN THE RICHEST AND THE POOREST HAS GROWN.Gap Between the Share of Capital Income earned by the top 1%and the bottom 80%:1980 = 10%2003 = 56%A 5.6 times increase.

6. AND THE AMERICAN DREAM IS GONE.The Probabilityy of Moving Up from the Bottom 40% to the Top 40%:1945 = 12%1958 = 6%1990 = 3%2000 = 2%A 10% Decrease.Links:1 = ftp://ftp.bls.gov/pub/special.requests/pf/totalf1.txt1 = https://www.clevelandfed.org/Researc...s/No7Nov04.pdf1 = Clipboard01.jpg (image)2 – Congratulations to Emmanuel Saez | The White House3 = http://www.demos.org/inequality/imag...ving_thumb.gif3 = http://www.bea.gov/national/nipaweb/...&LastYear=20104 = http://www.prudentbear.com/index.php...or-debt-of-gdp4 = FRB: Z.1 Release--Financial Accounts of the United States--June 6, 20135/6 =
Wealth And Inequality In America - Business Insiderhttp://factleft.com/2011/03/28/the-demise-of-the-american-middle-class-in-numbers/

Reaganism has ruined America- Thank god for flag waving, bible thumping, chickenhawk bs propaganda for the ugly American hater dupes. see sig para 1...

Blah blah blah blah. Do y'all all have the hive mentality?

 

[ClosedCaption]

The title should be 6 excuses people who think they are victims can use to explain why they are failing in life.

You hear that America? Go out there and get out of debt ya lazy bum!