Income Inequality Is A Myth

[mudwhistle]

I'm still wondering how only the top one percent of the people in this nation own 23 percent of it's wealth.

I'm also wondering why those in the top two percent have seen their incomes rise significantly over the past few years, while those in the lower 98 percent have seen little to no increase, even though the stock market is doing great?

Maybe because it's a media fabrication.

And Obama pumping $85,000,000,000.00/mo. into the market while stagnating wages for the Middle Class has helped.

 

[Vox]

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

and what is wrong with that? very fair distribution - the bottom 50% are the same one who are not paying federal income taxes. Maybe that is the reason?

 

[theHawk]

I'm still wondering how only the top one percent of the people in this nation own 23 percent of it's wealth.

I'm also wondering why those in the top two percent have seen their incomes rise significantly over the past few years, while those in the lower 98 percent have seen little to no increase, even though the stock market is doing great?

I'd like to know that too, examples that is. Liberals all seem to parrot this message that a small percentage of people own a large percentage of everything in America. But we're never given any examples.

 

[Vox]

Actually, the tax cuts for the wealthy were done under that GOP darling known as Bush Jr., while the rest of us got a measly 300 dollar check.

Don't' LIE.
The tax cuts were ACROSS THE BOARD.
And your darling obama wants to increase taxes the ACROSS THE BOARD.
Naming those who earn 200K+ "millionaires and billionaires".

That's a leftard math for the idiots like YOU.

 

[The Rabbi]

Actually, the tax cuts for the wealthy were done under that GOP darling known as Bush Jr., while the rest of us got a measly 300 dollar check.

Don't' LIE.
The tax cuts were ACROSS THE BOARD.
And your darling obama wants to increase taxes the ACROSS THE BOARD.
Naming those who earn 200K+ "millionaires and billionaires".

That's a leftard math for the idiots like YOU.

The cuts were so bad that a solidly Democratic Congress passed their extension and Obama signed it. If BikerCumDump only got a $300 check it means he didnt earn any income. No shock there.

 

[healthmyths]

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

And in the famous words of our President...
"..And did I mention he’s black?"
Obama at Florida fund-raiser says GOP will go after him because he is black. Pool report. - Lynn Sweet

 

[kaz]

That's just stupid. The difference between the 1% and the 99% isn't what we have, it's we did with what we have.

Fuck you, you piece of shit asshole, who is a traitor to this country!

1% of the population, own 70% of the assets.

That's income inequality you fucking prick!

Wow, your tantrum shows a shot pretty close to home. Your reaction to people doing what they did with what they got indicates you've been told you're lazy and doing nothing with what you got. Maybe the people telling you that are right...

Income inequality is a myth, the op is right. Not that life is fair, but anyone letting anything but their drive, intelligence and ability holding them back is just coping out. I'm a white male and life gave me nothing but what I worked for.

 

[kaz]

Here's the real myth: that 1%ers who make $450,000 per year are the equivalent tax sheltering billionaires like Warren Buffet.

But that's not the issue.

The issue is all the tax breaks and loopholes the 1% get that the rest of us don't.

Since the 1% earn 20% of the income but pay 40% of the taxes, those "tax breaks and loopholes" aren't nearly enough.

 

[KevinWestern]

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

Money makes money and at some point most of the world's wealth is owned and controlled by a very few people/networks. Any idiot with a billion dollars can make a million dollars in a given year, whereas a super genius with only $2k to his name would have some serious issues making a million dollars in that same year. For this reason, it's a fact wealth will snowball.

I know this is a discussion directly related to income inequality, per se, but I believe the topic of "wealth inequality" is directly relevant.

Now, I'm not calling for socialism or wealth redistribution or anything like that, but do want to mention that when you concentrate most all of your wealth and resource into the hands of just a few, society will miss out on all the potential geniuses/ideas of people who never got a chance to share their work because they missed out on a good education, were struggling to pay bills, etc.

 

[thereisnospoon]

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

Money makes money and at some point most of the world's wealth is owned and controlled by a very few people/networks. Any idiot with a billion dollars can make a million dollars in a given year, whereas a super genius with only $2k to his name would have some serious issues making a million dollars in that same year. For this reason, it's a fact wealth will snowball.

I know this is a discussion directly related to income inequality, per se, but I believe the topic of "wealth inequality" is directly relevant.

Now, I'm not calling for socialism or wealth redistribution or anything like that, but do want to mention that when you concentrate most all of your wealth and resource into the hands of just a few, society will miss out on all the potential geniuses/ideas of people who never got a chance to share their work because they missed out on a good education, were struggling to pay bills, etc.

This is NOT a societal issue. It is a political issue.
It makes no difference to me what someone else has or earns. It's none of my business. It has no effect on me whatsoever.
Inequality( of outcome) is a ruse used by democrat political candidates to gin up support for their respective elections. Period. Done. End of story.

 

[OnePercenter]

I'm still wondering how only the top one percent of the people in this nation own 23 percent of it's wealth.

I'm also wondering why those in the top two percent have seen their incomes rise significantly over the past few years, while those in the lower 98 percent have seen little to no increase, even though the stock market is doing great?

I'd like to know that too, examples that is. Liberals all seem to parrot this message that a small percentage of people own a large percentage of everything in America. But we're never given any examples.

How about the Walmart seven?

 

[OnePercenter]

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

Money makes money and at some point most of the world's wealth is owned and controlled by a very few people/networks. Any idiot with a billion dollars can make a million dollars in a given year, whereas a super genius with only $2k to his name would have some serious issues making a million dollars in that same year. For this reason, it's a fact wealth will snowball.

I know this is a discussion directly related to income inequality, per se, but I believe the topic of "wealth inequality" is directly relevant.

Now, I'm not calling for socialism or wealth redistribution or anything like that, but do want to mention that when you concentrate most all of your wealth and resource into the hands of just a few, society will miss out on all the potential geniuses/ideas of people who never got a chance to share their work because they missed out on a good education, were struggling to pay bills, etc.

So the game is fixed. The question remains......Who did the fixing? Hint: It wasn't the Democrats.

 

[mudwhistle]

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

Money makes money and at some point most of the world's wealth is owned and controlled by a very few people/networks. Any idiot with a billion dollars can make a million dollars in a given year, whereas a super genius with only $2k to his name would have some serious issues making a million dollars in that same year. For this reason, it's a fact wealth will snowball.

I know this is a discussion directly related to income inequality, per se, but I believe the topic of "wealth inequality" is directly relevant.

Now, I'm not calling for socialism or wealth redistribution or anything like that, but do want to mention that when you concentrate most all of your wealth and resource into the hands of just a few, society will miss out on all the potential geniuses/ideas of people who never got a chance to share their work because they missed out on a good education, were struggling to pay bills, etc.

So the game is fixed. The question remains......Who did the fixing? Hint: It wasn't the Democrats.

These days Democrats don't play unless the game is rigged.

 

[KevinWestern]

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

Money makes money and at some point most of the world's wealth is owned and controlled by a very few people/networks. Any idiot with a billion dollars can make a million dollars in a given year, whereas a super genius with only $2k to his name would have some serious issues making a million dollars in that same year. For this reason, it's a fact wealth will snowball.

I know this is a discussion directly related to income inequality, per se, but I believe the topic of "wealth inequality" is directly relevant.

Now, I'm not calling for socialism or wealth redistribution or anything like that, but do want to mention that when you concentrate most all of your wealth and resource into the hands of just a few, society will miss out on all the potential geniuses/ideas of people who never got a chance to share their work because they missed out on a good education, were struggling to pay bills, etc.

So the game is fixed. The question remains......Who did the fixing? Hint: It wasn't the Democrats.

Lol, come on. The Democratic party is just as big and stuffed full with money as the Republicans; were do you think all those $'s come from? They all have strings attached.

Democrats/Republicans = THE ESTABLISHMENT

 

[KevinWestern]

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

Money makes money and at some point most of the world's wealth is owned and controlled by a very few people/networks. Any idiot with a billion dollars can make a million dollars in a given year, whereas a super genius with only $2k to his name would have some serious issues making a million dollars in that same year. For this reason, it's a fact wealth will snowball.

I know this is a discussion directly related to income inequality, per se, but I believe the topic of "wealth inequality" is directly relevant.

Now, I'm not calling for socialism or wealth redistribution or anything like that, but do want to mention that when you concentrate most all of your wealth and resource into the hands of just a few, society will miss out on all the potential geniuses/ideas of people who never got a chance to share their work because they missed out on a good education, were struggling to pay bills, etc.

This is NOT a societal issue. It is a political issue.
It makes no difference to me what someone else has or earns. It's none of my business. It has no effect on me whatsoever.
Inequality( of outcome) is a ruse used by democrat political candidates to gin up support for their respective elections. Period. Done. End of story.

I beg to differ. As the wealth continues to concentrate, it will have an effect on all of us. We have a finite amount of resources, and when it's concentrated in the hands of a very few people, the rest of society is missing out.

Just like a sports team, if you have a bigger pool of active applicants, your team will naturally be better.

We have way too many poor people in this country who (instead of engineering great ideas, starting companies, etc) are too busy working 2 jobs and are in mountains of debt. This means we miss out on the great idea they could have had if perhaps they had more time to be creative, etc.

Just my own point of view. Don't think extreme wealth stratification (which we have) is very healthy.

 

[thereisnospoon]

I'm still wondering how only the top one percent of the people in this nation own 23 percent of it's wealth.

I'm also wondering why those in the top two percent have seen their incomes rise significantly over the past few years, while those in the lower 98 percent have seen little to no increase, even though the stock market is doing great?

I'd like to know that too, examples that is. Liberals all seem to parrot this message that a small percentage of people own a large percentage of everything in America. But we're never given any examples.

How about the Walmart seven?

What about them? They own a controlling interest in the world's number one retailer and one of the largest companies on the globe. So what?..
If people did not shop at Walmart and no stock broker would take a dime of the Walton family money, they could not make any more.
So I suggest you use one of those two routes if you don't like those who accumulate wealth. Otherwise, your argument is just a pity party.

 

[g5000]

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

That video was not about income inequality. It was about equality in job opportunities for minorities and women.

It does not surprise me you did not realize this since you are only capable of copying and pasting other people's work and not able to articulate any thoughts of your own.

Also, that video is from the 70s. Income inequality was nowhere near the level back then it is today.

 

[thereisnospoon]

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

Money makes money and at some point most of the world's wealth is owned and controlled by a very few people/networks. Any idiot with a billion dollars can make a million dollars in a given year, whereas a super genius with only $2k to his name would have some serious issues making a million dollars in that same year. For this reason, it's a fact wealth will snowball.

I know this is a discussion directly related to income inequality, per se, but I believe the topic of "wealth inequality" is directly relevant.

Now, I'm not calling for socialism or wealth redistribution or anything like that, but do want to mention that when you concentrate most all of your wealth and resource into the hands of just a few, society will miss out on all the potential geniuses/ideas of people who never got a chance to share their work because they missed out on a good education, were struggling to pay bills, etc.

So the game is fixed. The question remains......Who did the fixing? Hint: It wasn't the Democrats.

Fixed?..How so? Anyone can take some of their savings and invest it in safe vehicles. Such as income funds. 401k's. IRA's...And other vehicles which cater to the small investor..
Where is it written that everyone should become a millionaire?
This is not a political issue of one side or the other. I'd like to point out that there are tons of wealthy people who donate to the DNC and support liberal causes that have investments all over the place. Their money make them money just like any other rich person. So what?
The idea that any one who is wealthy is automatically a card carrying member of the GOP and donates to the Heritage Society is a LIE...
In fact the largest concentration of wealth by geography is in the Blue State Northeast and on the Left Coast...
This country is full of limousine liberals.
You know...The kind that will fly alone cross country on a private jet that can carry 15 people because he or she is in a hurry to get to a conference on climate change.
The same people who have the "No to Keystone" bumper sticker on the back of their 10 MPG Range Rover.

 

[sealybobo]

Obama has stagnated our incomes at the same time he's pumping $85 billion/mo into the stock market throwing billions at the rich. He's intentionally widening the gap between the rich and the poor.

So is Trump with his new Tax bill
World's Wealthiest Billionaires Got Nearly $1 Trillion Richer In 2017: Bloomberg | HuffPost

 

[sealybobo]

Income inequality is just the old liberal argument of workplace discrimination on steroids. It's total horseshit.

There is no perfect income equality in any system, including Communism and Socialism.

Citing its Billionaires Index, Bloomberg reported Wednesday that the world’s 500 wealthiest people became almost $1 trillion richer in 2017. For comparison, that’s over four times as much wealth as they gained last year under Obama.