Charts from the senate income inequity hearing

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

When you "starve the beast" quess what happens?

the "beast" dies.

I can't think of a better outcome.

 

[Liability]

WHERE is your example in history of a revolution by the people that DOES NOT include an income inequality??????


You cant find one huh?

WTF are you babbling about?

Income inequality is as natural as height and weight differences.

You can't even grunt out a coherent thought, dip-shit.

Try a syllogism someday. It COULD (at least in theory) serve to clarify what passes for your "thought" process.

1. Income inequality is wrong because _________________.
2. There is income inequality in this Republic.
Therefore, there is a problem in this Republic that requires fixing.

The hard part will be for you to fill in the blank.

Forget your trite buzz phrases. Clearly, you don't even understand the basic concepts you toss around. So break it down into simple straightforward declarative sentences. Do some of the heavy lifting.

STATE, clearly and concisely, what the "wrong" is when you discuss income inequality.

What, for instance, in your ideal world, is the antithesis of "income inequality?"

 

[Big Fitz]

WHERE is your example in history of a revolution by the people that DOES NOT include an income inequality??????


You cant find one huh?

WTF are you babbling about?

Income inequality is as natural as height and weight differences.

You can't even grunt out a coherent thought, dip-shit.

Try a syllogism someday. It COULD (at least in theory) serve to clarify what passes for your "thought" process.

1. Income inequality is wrong because _________________.
2. There is income inequality in this Republic.
Therefore, there is a problem in this Republic that requires fixing.

The hard part will be for you to fill in the blank.

Forget your trite buzz phrases. Clearly, you don't even understand the basic concepts you toss around. So break it down into simple straightforward declarative sentences. Do some of the heavy lifting.

STATE, clearly and concisely, what the "wrong" is when you discuss income inequality.

What, for instance, in your ideal world, is the antithesis of "income inequality?"

Lemme help her on question #1.

 

[Truthmatters]

the Senate Budget Committee.


You guys are pretending its only posters is lying

 

[Big Fitz]

the Senate Budget Committee.


You guys are pretending its only posters is lying

Little tip to seem LESS insane. Quote who you're talking to.

 

[Truthmatters]

Mind-Blowing Charts From the Senate's Income Inequality Hearing | Mother Jones

Its from the senate budget committee.


Its reality wether you know how to live in reality or not

 

[Liability]

the Senate Budget Committee.


You guys are pretending its only posters is lying

"its only posters is"

TDM, you illiterate dumbass, it takes too much effort to translate your incoherent gibberish into English.

 

[The T]

WHERE is your example in history of a revolution by the people that DOES NOT include an income inequality??????


You cant find one huh?

WTF are you babbling about?

Income inequality is as natural as height and weight differences.

You can't even grunt out a coherent thought, dip-shit.

Try a syllogism someday. It COULD (at least in theory) serve to clarify what passes for your "thought" process.

1. Income inequality is wrong because _________________.
2. There is income inequality in this Republic.
Therefore, there is a problem in this Republic that requires fixing.

The hard part will be for you to fill in the blank.

Forget your trite buzz phrases. Clearly, you don't even understand the basic concepts you toss around. So break it down into simple straightforward declarative sentences. Do some of the heavy lifting.

STATE, clearly and concisely, what the "wrong" is when you discuss income inequality.

What, for instance, in your ideal world, is the antithesis of "income inequality?"

Her first mistake is beliving all people are the same and then must be lumped into groups, the haves and have-nots.

She has no concept of individualism.

 

[Full-Auto]

WHERE is your example in history of a revolution by the people that DOES NOT include an income inequality??????


You cant find one huh?

WTF are you babbling about?

Income inequality is as natural as height and weight differences.

You can't even grunt out a coherent thought, dip-shit.

Try a syllogism someday. It COULD (at least in theory) serve to clarify what passes for your "thought" process.

1. Income inequality is wrong because _________________.
2. There is income inequality in this Republic.
Therefore, there is a problem in this Republic that requires fixing.

The hard part will be for you to fill in the blank.

Forget your trite buzz phrases. Clearly, you don't even understand the basic concepts you toss around. So break it down into simple straightforward declarative sentences. Do some of the heavy lifting.

STATE, clearly and concisely, what the "wrong" is when you discuss income inequality.

What, for instance, in your ideal world, is the antithesis of "income inequality?"

Her first mistake is beliving all people are the same and then must be lumped into groups, the haves and have-nots.

She has no concept of individualism.

Careful you will have the Nazis suggesting public school uniforms again.

 

[The T]

WTF are you babbling about?

Income inequality is as natural as height and weight differences.

You can't even grunt out a coherent thought, dip-shit.

Try a syllogism someday. It COULD (at least in theory) serve to clarify what passes for your "thought" process.

1. Income inequality is wrong because _________________.
2. There is income inequality in this Republic.
Therefore, there is a problem in this Republic that requires fixing.

The hard part will be for you to fill in the blank.

Forget your trite buzz phrases. Clearly, you don't even understand the basic concepts you toss around. So break it down into simple straightforward declarative sentences. Do some of the heavy lifting.

STATE, clearly and concisely, what the "wrong" is when you discuss income inequality.

What, for instance, in your ideal world, is the antithesis of "income inequality?"

Her first mistake is beliving all people are the same and then must be lumped into groups, the haves and have-nots.

She has no concept of individualism.

Careful you will have the Nazis suggesting public school uniforms again.

 

[mudwhistle]

No democracy survives this type of inequity sustained.


Do you want our democracy to live on?

This is not a democracy.....it is a republic.

I cannot see why inequity is such a problem for you. It seems to have grown under Obama and will continue to grow. He seems to be encouraging the widening gap between the haves and the have-nots. His policies are making the rich even more rich.

Seems to me that if you live in a country that allows you to move out of the cellar and into the penthouse you would be more appreciative.

No, you want someone to give you what you think you deserve instead of earn it. If you lived in another country you couldn't even earn it because you weren't born into a privileged family.

 

[Truthmatters]

WHERE is you example from history guys?


Come on show us that time in history when a populous uprising was not coupled with a income inequality?



Its matters because its an historicla fact.


You just have to ignore history to buy the right wing propaganda lies.

 

[mudwhistle]

WHERE is you example from history guys?


Come on show us that time in history when a populous uprising was not coupled with a income inequality?



Its matters because its an historicla fact.


You just have to ignore history to buy the right wing propaganda lies.

I never said anything of the sort. Learn to focus.

Obama wants more inequality so he can start an uprising.

 

[Trajan]

what a load of malarkey....


Share of wealth held by the Bottom 99% and Top 1% in the United States, 1922-2007.
Bottom 99 percent Top 1 percent
1922 63.3% 36.7%
1929 55.8% 44.2%
1933 66.7% 33.3%
1939 63.6% 36.4%
1945 70.2% 29.8%
1949 72.9% 27.1%
1953 68.8% 31.2%
1962 68.2% 31.8%
1965 65.6% 34.4%
1969 68.9% 31.1%
1972 70.9% 29.1%
1976 80.1% 19.9%
1979 79.5% 20.5%
1981 75.2% 24.8%
1983 69.1% 30.9%
1986 68.1% 31.9%
1989 64.3% 35.7%
1992 62.8% 37.2%
1995 61.5% 38.5%
1998 61.9% 38.1%
2001 66.6% 33.4%
2004 65.7% 34.3%
2007 65.4% 34.6%

You mean that the variance of the two isn't that great over the years? Damn, listening to Art and Truth you would have thought there was a huge disparity between then and now.

no, frankly its not, becasue, this is an upwardly mobile society, and, it fluctuates.

the averages are;
top 1% 99%
67.61% 32.39%

 

[The T]

WHERE is you example from history guys?


Come on show us that time in history when a populous uprising was not coupled with a income inequality?



Its matters because its an historicla fact.


You just have to ignore history to buy the right wing propaganda lies.

I never said anything of the sort. Learn to focus.

Obama wants more inequality so he can start an uprising.

And then declare marshal law with himself as supreme commander...

 

[Liability]

WHERE is you example from history guys?


Come on show us that time in history when a populous uprising was not coupled with a income inequality?



Its matters because its an historicla fact.


You just have to ignore history to buy the right wing propaganda lies.

The American Revolution, according to you, was fought over income inequality?

Naturally, you're wrong.

But even if you were in some twisted way "correct," your point remains pointless.

Income inequality has always existed and always will.

So what?

YOU still cannot articulate what ABOUT the FACT that income inequality exists is a thing that requires "correction."

You are such a mindless drone, in fact, you won't even try.

 

[The T]

No democracy survives this type of inequity sustained.


Do you want our democracy to live on?

This is not a democracy.....it is a republic.

I cannot see why inequity is such a problem for you. It seems to have grown under Obama and will continue to grow. He seems to be encouraging the widening gap between the haves and the have-nots. His policies are making the rich even more rich.

Seems to me that if you live in a country that allows you to move out of the cellar and into the penthouse you would be more appreciative.

No, you want someone to give you what you think you deserve instead of earn it. If you lived in another country you couldn't even earn it because you weren't born into a privileged family.

I belive the term is Aristocracy...

 

[Truthmatters]

Why is the right refusing to back up their claims once again?


Prove income inequality has NO effect on revolutions?

 

[Trajan]

Why is the right refusing to back up their claims once again?


Prove income inequality has NO effect on revolutions?

I just did, I posted a chart showing the point iin your OP is just warmed over poppeycock. the variance over 90 years has been remarkably close.

 

[mudwhistle]

No democracy survives this type of inequity sustained.


Do you want our democracy to live on?

This is not a democracy.....it is a republic.

I cannot see why inequity is such a problem for you. It seems to have grown under Obama and will continue to grow. He seems to be encouraging the widening gap between the haves and the have-nots. His policies are making the rich even more rich.

Seems to me that if you live in a country that allows you to move out of the cellar and into the penthouse you would be more appreciative.

No, you want someone to give you what you think you deserve instead of earn it. If you lived in another country you couldn't even earn it because you weren't born into a privileged family.

I belive the term is Aristocracy...

Pretty much. Snobs ruling the rest of us peasants.