Income Inequality Is A Myth

[alan1]

Wealth and income are two entirely different things.
Chris again shows that he can't understand.

 

[mudwhistle]

Obama using the invisible 1% as a target to attack just to maintain his support.
It's pathetic.

Especially taking into account he's one of the 1%......

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Fl4YTn75cY]Obama: Nearly All Income Gains Flow to Top 1% - YouTube[/ame]

 

[thereisnospoon]

North Korea, China, Cuba, UK, Sweden, Venezuela, Australia are just a few of the countries worldwide where ALL have income inequality where someone, some genders, an entire class, are making more money annually (income) than someone else. The difference is in the US, there is more opportunity to close that gap. Why fuck with it?

To those on the left, it is all about appearances.
During the last drive to raise taxes Obama was asked why he wanted to increase capital gains taxes even though the reduced rate of 15% created more revenue for the federal government. Obama's response was that he just did not think the rate was appropriate.
In other words, he does not like how it looks..
On planet liberal, there is no such thing as a tax rate that is too high.

 

[Crackerjaxon]

Income inequality is a fabrication the Dems used to attack the rich.

True. I think that they use it to manipulate the poor, much more than to attack the rich, though.

 

[Freewill]

Income inequality is a fabrication the Dems used to attack the rich.

True. I think that they use it to manipulate the poor, much more than to attack the rich, though.

Can't fault the democrats for liking the poor, hell they like them so much they have spent a lot of time creating more.

 

[Freewill]

North Korea, China, Cuba, UK, Sweden, Venezuela, Australia are just a few of the countries worldwide where ALL have income inequality where someone, some genders, an entire class, are making more money annually (income) than someone else. The difference is in the US, there is more opportunity to close that gap. Why fuck with it?

To those on the left, it is all about appearances.
During the last drive to raise taxes Obama was asked why he wanted to increase capital gains taxes even though the reduced rate of 15% created more revenue for the federal government. Obama's response was that he just did not think the rate was appropriate.
In other words, he does not like how it looks..
On planet liberal, there is no such thing as a tax rate that is too high.

More to the point, he doesn't know, and it sounds good.

 

[thereisnospoon]

He really does not know what we are talking about when we discuss income inequality.

It is fucking amazing.

I was fucking with you at the start of this thread, Mud.....but it was warranted. You really don't know what it means.

I feel like I am mocking a retard, here.

Ok mr mini van, explain it to us...

 

[thereisnospoon]

My god dude. The wage disaparity between men and women is a completley separate issue from the enormous income inequality between the rich and the middle class. This was seriously supposed to be evidence of that? A 5 minute video about income differences between the genders and races? Lol this forum never ceases to amaze me.

If you think that is a myth, then you are willfully ignorant.

I guess you don't understand what inequality means when a proponent talks about income differences.

They're trying to assert that there is some inherent unfairness in the system.

The system weeds out the pretenders and rewards those who are innovative. What you and other liberals are trying to say is regardless everyone should be paid equally, even if they're the most worthless POS on the planet.

As usual a con doesn't understand any issue without it being black-and-white. Nuance just escapes you doesn't. I don't think we should be paid equally. I support the idea of a CEO making much more money than a low level worker. The problem isn't inequality itself. The problem is the enormous disparity that there actually is between the middle class and the mega wealthy. The top 1% controls 40% of the nation's wealth. That is what's wrong. Do you honestly believe that the 1% deserves that much wealth? Do you honestly believe the top 1% EARNED that money? No way.

Wording your statement differently does not change the message.
Just admit that you are bothered by those with wealth.
You are another person who buys into the Keynesian theory of the zero sum game.
It's false.
There is no "share".
There is no "pie"..
There is no magic pot of money cloistered away in an undisclosed location from which all business draws money that they all deliberately keep from their respective workers.
The liberal mindset on this is well documented.

 

[LoneLaugher]

He really does not know what we are talking about when we discuss income inequality.

It is fucking amazing.

I was fucking with you at the start of this thread, Mud.....but it was warranted. You really don't know what it means.

I feel like I am mocking a retard, here.

Ok mr mini van, explain it to us...

Mr minivan? Is this another one of your inside jokes? Meaning...the ones that are only interesting inside your own dopey head?

Would you like to discuss automobiles? I own 5. None of them minivans. The problem with the discussion, of course....is that you will lie. Just like you lied in our first conversation here. Right coach?

 

[Billy000]

I guess you don't understand what inequality means when a proponent talks about income differences.

They're trying to assert that there is some inherent unfairness in the system.

The system weeds out the pretenders and rewards those who are innovative. What you and other liberals are trying to say is regardless everyone should be paid equally, even if they're the most worthless POS on the planet.

As usual a con doesn't understand any issue without it being black-and-white. Nuance just escapes you doesn't. I don't think we should be paid equally. I support the idea of a CEO making much more money than a low level worker. The problem isn't inequality itself. The problem is the enormous disparity that there actually is between the middle class and the mega wealthy. The top 1% controls 40% of the nation's wealth. That is what's wrong. Do you honestly believe that the 1% deserves that much wealth? Do you honestly believe the top 1% EARNED that money? No way.

Why is that wrong? Why do you get to say who "deserves" what?

People deserve the income their labor yields. The top 1% is benefiting from most of the labor that low level workers are putting in.

 

[thereisnospoon]

You need to watch this video to understand the truth of my assertion that income inequality is simply a liberal myth.

Thomas Sowell Dismantles Feminism and Racialism in under 5 Minutes - YouTube

like i've said these ass clown republicans, the stupid people, keep following stupid people ... its like a moth drawn to a light... these republican ass clowns can't help themselves ... hey ass clown republicans that bulb is hot!!!

Don't post here unless you have something of substance to add to the discussion.
Drive by posts where you just hurl insults will not be permitted.
So, go do some homework and come to the table with a rebuttal. Otherwise you can go pop open a can of Bud and watch tv on your sofa you keep on your front porch. The one that over looks the junked 1972 AMC Rambler in your front yard which abuts an interstate on ramp.

 

[Billy000]

I guess you don't understand what inequality means when a proponent talks about income differences.

They're trying to assert that there is some inherent unfairness in the system.

The system weeds out the pretenders and rewards those who are innovative. What you and other liberals are trying to say is regardless everyone should be paid equally, even if they're the most worthless POS on the planet.

As usual a con doesn't understand any issue without it being black-and-white. Nuance just escapes you doesn't. I don't think we should be paid equally. I support the idea of a CEO making much more money than a low level worker. The problem isn't inequality itself. The problem is the enormous disparity that there actually is between the middle class and the mega wealthy. The top 1% controls 40% of the nation's wealth. That is what's wrong. Do you honestly believe that the 1% deserves that much wealth? Do you honestly believe the top 1% EARNED that money? No way.

Wording your statement differently does not change the message.
Just admit that you are bothered by those with wealth.
You are another person who buys into the Keynesian theory of the zero sum game.
It's false.
There is no "share".
There is no "pie"..
There is no magic pot of money cloistered away in an undisclosed location from which all business draws money that they all deliberately keep from their respective workers.
The liberal mindset on this is well documented.

You are so stupid. Why would I lie? If I hated the rich, why wouldn't I just say so? You just can't stand the fact that I don't fit into your small minded stereotype you have about the left. Obviously it is too much for your brain to handle.

 

[The Rabbi]

In the studies of what caused the Great Depression the first thing usually listed is inequality of income.

Uh no. The first thing listed is usually the actions of the Federal Reserve in tightening the money supply.
Then comes the Smoot-Hawley tariff, the Obamacare of its day.
Then the stock market crash in 1929.

Actually I've never seen any study cite "inequality of income" as a reason.

 

[mudwhistle]

As usual a con doesn't understand any issue without it being black-and-white. Nuance just escapes you doesn't. I don't think we should be paid equally. I support the idea of a CEO making much more money than a low level worker. The problem isn't inequality itself. The problem is the enormous disparity that there actually is between the middle class and the mega wealthy. The top 1% controls 40% of the nation's wealth. That is what's wrong. Do you honestly believe that the 1% deserves that much wealth? Do you honestly believe the top 1% EARNED that money? No way.

Why is that wrong? Why do you get to say who "deserves" what?

People deserve the income their labor yields. The top 1% is benefiting from most of the labor that low level workers are putting in.

That is a Marxist stereotype.

Sometimes being smart, or just plain lucky, means you all of the sudden become a 1%er.

I made it one year when I sold my house in San Diego.

My wife made sure all of that dough went into property. After Obama is gone I'll sell that property and become a 1%er again, temporarily.

 

[thereisnospoon]

.

Three pages into this thread and all I'm seeing are the traditional name-calling and personal insults.

I wonder if I can get a straight, mature, civil answer to this question:

A 45-year old man and a 45-year old woman have identical resumes and backgrounds and have held the same position for the same amount of time. Is there evidence that the man is paid more?

If so, that's obviously wrong. But is there evidence that this is happening nationally?

.

You'll not get an answer to that question. The lib narrative on this issue will not allow it.
They want to control the discussion and limit to the top paid executives and board members. Why? Because the libs see the numbers are big and scary..

 

[LoneLaugher]

You need to watch this video to understand the truth of my assertion that income inequality is simply a liberal myth.

Thomas Sowell Dismantles Feminism and Racialism in under 5 Minutes - YouTube

like i've said these ass clown republicans, the stupid people, keep following stupid people ... its like a moth drawn to a light... these republican ass clowns can't help themselves ... hey ass clown republicans that bulb is hot!!!

Don't post here unless you have something of substance to add to the discussion.
Drive by posts where you just hurl insults will not be permitted.
So, go do some homework and come to the table with a rebuttal. Otherwise you can go pop open a can of Bud and watch tv on your sofa you keep on your front porch. The one that over looks the junked 1972 AMC Rambler in your front yard which abuts an interstate on ramp.

Ouch! You really know how to hurt a guy.

Can you be more lame?

 

[Mac1958]

.

Three pages into this thread and all I'm seeing are the traditional name-calling and personal insults.

I wonder if I can get a straight, mature, civil answer to this question:

A 45-year old man and a 45-year old woman have identical resumes and backgrounds and have held the same position for the same amount of time. Is there evidence that the man is paid more?

If so, that's obviously wrong. But is there evidence that this is happening nationally?

.

You'll not get an answer to that question. The lib narrative on this issue will not allow it.
They want to control the discussion and limit to the top paid executives and board members. Why? Because the libs see the numbers are big and scary..

Well, I haven't received a straight answer yet.

That's weird, since I hear about this so often.

Seems like a reasonable question.

.

 

[Plasmaball]

.

Three pages into this thread and all I'm seeing are the traditional name-calling and personal insults.

I wonder if I can get a straight, mature, civil answer to this question:

A 45-year old man and a 45-year old woman have identical resumes and backgrounds and have held the same position for the same amount of time. Is there evidence that the man is paid more?

If so, that's obviously wrong. But is there evidence that this is happening nationally?

.

You'll not get an answer to that question. The lib narrative on this issue will not allow it.
They want to control the discussion and limit to the top paid executives and board members. Why? Because the libs see the numbers are big and scary..

saying stupid things isnt helping, you should stop.

 

[mudwhistle]

.

Three pages into this thread and all I'm seeing are the traditional name-calling and personal insults.

I wonder if I can get a straight, mature, civil answer to this question:

A 45-year old man and a 45-year old woman have identical resumes and backgrounds and have held the same position for the same amount of time. Is there evidence that the man is paid more?

If so, that's obviously wrong. But is there evidence that this is happening nationally?

.

You'll not get an answer to that question. The lib narrative on this issue will not allow it.
They want to control the discussion and limit to the top paid executives and board members. Why? Because the libs see the numbers are big and scary..

saying stupid things isnt helping, you should stop.

Ditto

 

[Plasmaball]

.

Three pages into this thread and all I'm seeing are the traditional name-calling and personal insults.

I wonder if I can get a straight, mature, civil answer to this question:

A 45-year old man and a 45-year old woman have identical resumes and backgrounds and have held the same position for the same amount of time. Is there evidence that the man is paid more?

If so, that's obviously wrong. But is there evidence that this is happening nationally?

.

You'll not get an answer to that question. The lib narrative on this issue will not allow it.
They want to control the discussion and limit to the top paid executives and board members. Why? Because the libs see the numbers are big and scary..

Well, I haven't received a straight answer yet.

That's weird, since I hear about this so often.

Seems like a reasonable question.

.

Well apply some simple logic. 1) i am not sure you will find actual evidence, because frankly who would admit to it? 2) for sake of argument we know sexism happens. We know that some men feel women shouldnt be in the work force, doing certain jobs, and are not at the same level as other men. ( see military or fireman as an example.) So the idea that their are some men who reluctantly hire women, would pay them less. Its not that far of a stretch.

As for income inequality. Well again like everything else on this planet, there has to be a balance. No i dont mean everyones wage has to be equal. I am talking ratios. There will always be rich, middle and poor classes, but if you dont have that balance things will get wonky for any nation. We are seeing a surge in the separation of rich to poor. Thats an issue that needs to be fixed.

There is nothing wrong with being rich, nobody has ever made that argument that you shouldn't have that money.( at least in any majority, one person here or there is nothing to worry about)

The issues come with the idea that some rich rig the game, they give out bonuses after taxing tax payer bailouts, or use tax loopholes to keep out of paying taxes ( see rigging the game).

Once you get past the stupid left vs right thing the OP and a few others are playing at you can actually see the issues at hand, but some people can't get past being a partisan.