"Income Inequality": So What?

[kwc57]

Let me begin stating that times are nothing at all like they used to be. I was born in 59, first of 3 children to a steelworker (36 years - retired) and house mom. We had electricity and running water in NW IL.

I dropped out of school in 75 and went straight to work as a warehouseman. Received my ged in 81. Got hired on as a trackman with Chicago & NW RR before relocating to TX to work for Norfolk Southern and hopefully year-round. Later I went to work for a very large construction contractor based out of Tulsa, OK, working in TX. Returned to IL in 87 working the state as soil surveyor before accepting a job for a slaughter/packing house as a foreman and ended up in the offset printing trade for 8 years before returning to school. Received my B.S. of Science in Recreation Management, minoring in Environmental Studies and graduated in 99.

Stayed in downstate IL after getting my degree and have been here going on 20 years. Worked for the park district as asst super of their 18 hole golf course, while trying to get on with the state in conservation. No go, even with my degree. Ended up taking a job helping a young man/entrepreneur get a franchise up and running, hurt my back badly and he suddenly had no use for me. After a year long recovery process and after sending out and delivering well over 150 app's I decided to put my one of my expertise's in lawncare and landscape to work and now have my own business for the past 4 years which is doing quite well. Puts food on the table with some left over.

I have 4 children, one dying at birth, 3 of which are still alive. Oldest boy is 34 and works for a secretive electronic hardware developer. 2nd son is 17 and doing well. Youngest daughter is now 15 and doing very well in school and sports.

As I stated at the very start times are NOTHING like they were back then, so there is no need for comparison imho. Unemployment for youth is currently in the 20% range, blacks 15%, whites 8.2% and I believe those figures do not tell the entire story or are accurate of just how bad it is. Wages have been going down or stagnant for blue collar workers for decades - since the reagan days and trickle-down bs that has not worked and never will, WHILE wealth has been increasing steadily for corporations and the upper 10%.

"Can't" ain't got shit to do with this depression combined with the foreclosures fiasco the banks brought on themselves and have no one to blame but themselves, but then again they don't give a rats ass what we peasants think.

THank you for replying. One of my mantras here at USMB is that life is about choices and choices matter. You were born in 59, me in 57. I graduated high school in 75 when you dropped out as a freshman. In 79, I graduated college and in 81, you got your GED. You went from a warehouse, to railroad, to construction, to soil survey, to a packing house and then offset printing over a 20 year period before getting your degree in 99. I'm sure you learned skills from one job that carried to another, but changing from one industry to another usually isn't a bump in pay because you are learning a whole new job. Imagine if you had stayed in school and graduated in 81 and then gone to college and graduated in 85 and spent the last 27 years in the same career path. Do you think life would be different for you? Do you think you'd have a different view of how to succeed? Do you think you'd have struggled as much? Do you think you'd blame people who have done better than you? We live and die by the choices WE make. We can't blame other people for our fortune or misfortune. Other choices that can be made....move locations. Looks like you did some of that, but for the unemployment rates you were listing for kids......it depends on where you live. If I had grown up in someplace like Detroit for example, I'd have been long gone long ago. Another smart choice is in what you study in school. I have a neice pushing 30 who is working on her doctorate in Medieval Literature. She is a highly intelligent girl. I'm interested in seeing what kind of job she gets when she is finally thru with school. Unless some old white haired professor dies at some college to create an opening, she will probably be a struggling public school teacher. There are good high paying career jobs out there, but you'd better get an education in the fields those jobs are in.

Look, I'm not trying to criticize you. We all pick a path and follow it. But the choices we make determine that path and the outcome. Blaming rich people because they have more than you is putting the blame in the wrong place.

So glad you felt the need to sit in judgement based on a summary of my life, while joining in with those who would love nothing better than deny me and anyone like me the right to sit in judgement of those with plenty or more than they ever will need be damned all the suffering in the lower classes. Also, so glad you made all the right decisions. Some folks can fall into a vat of shit and coming out smelling like a rose, me I'm not one of those people.

LOL Oh, trust me, I've made some very bad decisions in my life and I've paid for them. It's simply part of being human. BUT, I've always recognized that they were MY decisions and didn't try to blame anyone else or get angry at those who made a better decision. Life isn't fair. Never has been. Never will be. We live and die by the decisions WE make. I actually wasn't trying to be judgemental of you. All I asked was what if you had decided to stay in school, go to college and graduate in 81 instead of 99? What if you had chosen a career field and done that work for the last 30 years? Do you think your financial outcome and world view might be altered from what it is today? I bet it would.

 

[kwc57]

Provide "for" the general welfare

Do what is best for the country

Which isn't taking money from half the citizens to provide a home, food, education, medical, etc. for the other half from cradle to grave.

Do what is best for the country

Half the country does not provide homes, food, education and medical for the other half

Like most modern societies, we do provide for our less fortunate by providing a safety net. That has been found to be in the best interests of the country

Yes, we do assist our less fortunate......which we should. It's all the able bodied multi-generational moochers who know a sweet deal when they see one who milks the system.....and it's growing. That is NOT in the best interest of the country.

 

[Moonglow]

I believe in income equality. In my trade as a mason, ie; brick, block, rock, tile and concrete layer/ contractor since 1987, has taughted over a thousound kids how to be men and women, how to be self respecting tradepersons and (as the old timers told me, "bricklaying! Why that's house buying money there".) could earn as much as I and live adequately and can travel over much of the US with this trade.

Get up and go pays.

 

[gallantwarrior]

The rising tide no longer raises all boats. Instead of ambition, our poor has envy. Instead of initiative they have jealously. Whether it's a big boat or a dinghy the boat has to be rowed. In our system, we have a few people doing the rowing, with many of them entitled to be along for the ride and demanding the lifejackets.

You are accusing the poor of lack of ambition and envy..completely avoiding the primary reason for the income gap, GREED. How many $billions did our government give the bankers and what do you think would have happened if they'd given that money to those who would spend it instead?

As you know, I volunteer at a local church and give out lunches every monday. Most of the people we see are having hard times, some through choice, other because of things done to them...we lost one of our regulars today due to pneumonia. He was not even 30. His whole life ahead of him and no job no matter how much he tried looking. Of course, it's hard to get hired when you have no address.

I'll bet a lot of you are now thinking how good it is that this young man is gone...no more hand outs for him....I pity you.

You know, I've often wondered just how much better it would have been to just pay off the first mortgage owed by every person over the age of 25 instead of handing that money over to the banks. The money would most certainly have had a much more positive impact for the people owing those "bad" mortgages, and the money would still have found its way into the hands of the bankers. At least the people would have benefited and most would have been able to avoid going bankrupt, with all the subsequent consequences.

 

[gallantwarrior]

Just curious but you didn't mention a husband. Is she married?

Yes, she is married. They have managed to avoid becoming enslaved by the common pitfall of easy money. They do not have credit cards and avoid having them. They have paid off their car (a rather modest model). They represent a nuclear family with a mother whose primary function is to raise children and support the husband's career. I will not tell you that it is easy for her, but she accepts her role and deals with it. I would be hard pressed to do the same....

Sad to say it is rare in these times. Neither of my kids are married yet but many of their friends from high school have multiple children from multiple mates with no job prospects. It is sad to see kids you thought were pretty stable screw up their lives
Your daughter and son in law seem like they have their lives together. Rare in this generation

Thank you. I am a bit prideful that these youngsters are doing things the way they have been. It isn't financially easy, but she's taught me a few tricks, which come in handy as my paychecks appear to be decreasing every payday. Right now, he's determined to end his military career when this enlistment is done. Three deployments overseas in 7 years is a challenge for any family. For my part, I'm eagerly looking forward to having some help around the farm. And, yes, I plan on teaching my granddaughters how to care for the animals and the land.
Wishing you a pleasant day. GW

 

[Katzndogz]

The rising tide no longer raises all boats. Instead of ambition, our poor has envy. Instead of initiative they have jealously. Whether it's a big boat or a dinghy the boat has to be rowed. In our system, we have a few people doing the rowing, with many of them entitled to be along for the ride and demanding the lifejackets.

You are accusing the poor of lack of ambition and envy..completely avoiding the primary reason for the income gap, GREED. How many $billions did our government give the bankers and what do you think would have happened if they'd given that money to those who would spend it instead?

As you know, I volunteer at a local church and give out lunches every monday. Most of the people we see are having hard times, some through choice, other because of things done to them...we lost one of our regulars today due to pneumonia. He was not even 30. His whole life ahead of him and no job no matter how much he tried looking. Of course, it's hard to get hired when you have no address.

I'll bet a lot of you are now thinking how good it is that this young man is gone...no more hand outs for him....I pity you.

Giving money to the poor has the same effect as dumping it ito the ocean. Nothing. The poor spend it, mostly on cheap junk made in foreign countries. They don't invest it, they don't put it to work. They won't even use it to buy textbooks for school. Give the poor money and they'll buy Nikes for $200.00 made in Bangladesh and Ipads made in China.

My old landlord came here from Greece at the age of 14 and got a job in a garment sweatshop (how many American poor are willing to work in a sweatshop). In his off hours he worked for FREE at a tailor shop (How many American poor will work for free) just to get a few skills. He saved every cent he made. (How many poor are willing to give up the beer, the pot, the tv sets to save money?) When he got good enough he opened a small tailor shop of his own and lived in the back. He saved everything and bought a house. He didn't live in the house. He rented it out. When he married, he and his wife lived and worked in the tailor shop and bought another house that they didn't live in. They continued to live in the back of the tailor shop and rented the house out.

Today he's part of the 1%. He lives in a sprawling mansion in Rancho Palos Verdes. He lives off investments and spends his time on cruises all over the world. I know many like him. No American "poor" who complain because they can't find a job no matter how hard they look, but foreigners.

I will NOT help people stay poor. I won't feed them, give them money, clothe them, I'll throw it away in the trash before I help the poor stay poor.

The primary cause of poverty isn't the greed of the rich. It's the greed of the poor.

 

[JoeNormal]

liability; Apparently, seeing as you live here writing your useless smack all hours of the day night, you do not work? How do you make a living? Certainly cannot be educated. I've yet to read any useful input coming from you. You must lead a sad hateful life indeed.

He's apparently a beta tester for MS Spell Check.

 

[The Rabbi]

Giving money to people is a waste because every dollar given must come from somewhere else. And no, Obama does not have a stash somewhere. So money given to unproductive people must come from productive people. How does that make sense?

 

[JoeNormal]

Giving money to people is a waste because every dollar given must come from somewhere else. And no, Obama does not have a stash somewhere. So money given to unproductive people must come from productive people. How does that make sense?

Where did your fixation on the 'direct' relationship of productivity to compensation come from? Have you ever actually worked in a large corporation? Have you heard about what's been happening on Wall Street over the last couple of decades?

 

[Againsheila]

The rising tide no longer raises all boats. Instead of ambition, our poor has envy. Instead of initiative they have jealously. Whether it's a big boat or a dinghy the boat has to be rowed. In our system, we have a few people doing the rowing, with many of them entitled to be along for the ride and demanding the lifejackets.

You are accusing the poor of lack of ambition and envy..completely avoiding the primary reason for the income gap, GREED. How many $billions did our government give the bankers and what do you think would have happened if they'd given that money to those who would spend it instead?

As you know, I volunteer at a local church and give out lunches every monday. Most of the people we see are having hard times, some through choice, other because of things done to them...we lost one of our regulars today due to pneumonia. He was not even 30. His whole life ahead of him and no job no matter how much he tried looking. Of course, it's hard to get hired when you have no address.

I'll bet a lot of you are now thinking how good it is that this young man is gone...no more hand outs for him....I pity you.

Giving money to the poor has the same effect as dumping it ito the ocean. Nothing. The poor spend it, mostly on cheap junk made in foreign countries. They don't invest it, they don't put it to work. They won't even use it to buy textbooks for school. Give the poor money and they'll buy Nikes for $200.00 made in Bangladesh and Ipads made in China.

My old landlord came here from Greece at the age of 14 and got a job in a garment sweatshop (how many American poor are willing to work in a sweatshop). In his off hours he worked for FREE at a tailor shop (How many American poor will work for free) just to get a few skills. He saved every cent he made. (How many poor are willing to give up the beer, the pot, the tv sets to save money?) When he got good enough he opened a small tailor shop of his own and lived in the back. He saved everything and bought a house. He didn't live in the house. He rented it out. When he married, he and his wife lived and worked in the tailor shop and bought another house that they didn't live in. They continued to live in the back of the tailor shop and rented the house out.

Today he's part of the 1%. He lives in a sprawling mansion in Rancho Palos Verdes. He lives off investments and spends his time on cruises all over the world. I know many like him. No American "poor" who complain because they can't find a job no matter how hard they look, but foreigners.

I will NOT help people stay poor. I won't feed them, give them money, clothe them, I'll throw it away in the trash before I help the poor stay poor.

The primary cause of poverty isn't the greed of the rich. It's the greed of the poor.

Bulcrap...they spend the money on food and rent and utilities, hardly things that come from China. Do some take advantage of the system? Yeah, mostly those illegal immigrants who sneak across our border and have kids then claim they aren't married while their husband works under the table. They send their money home so it can't be traced and are actually wealthier than some of our wealthiest people, especially when they go back to their own country.

It's the middleclass that's been losing ground....we need our middleclass to become a strong society again. I'm so glad you would rather the poor starve and die than give them money or help to become productive members of society, when the revolution starts, I hope you are one of the first to go, though in reality I know you will somehow survive and make it seem as though it was your idea.

No country can long survive with the majority of it's wealth in the hands of a few.

Oh, and immigrants who come here can get help not available to American citizens. Russians got low interest loans to purchase business when they then ran for 5 years tax free, the end of 5 years, they brought over their brother, or another relative, sold it to him, making a fortune and the brother then ran the business for 5 years tax free while paying for it with a low interest loan from our government. Ever wonder why businesses run by foreigners change hands so often? That's why.

It's also, probably, the main reason your Greek friend was able to advance as he did while most American citizens are tied to the bottom rung of the ladder with most of the middle rungs missing.

While my husband was unemployed and I was looking for work, I was astounded to find an organization paid by our tax dollars whose only purpose was in helping the Russians learn how to use our system. No such organization exists for American citizens..needless to say, they didn't hire me, and yeah, if I could have gotten the job I would have worked there, hating it all the time. It took me more than a year to find a job back then, the first time in my life it took me more than 2 weeks to find a job. When I found one, I kept it for a year and a half and then it was sent to India. So glad you didn't spend ONE penny to help us. I thank God every day for our luck and our family and our neighbors and friends, without which, we would have lost EVERYTHING. At the moment, I am also thanking God that you're not my neighbor.

 

[KevinWestern]

Giving money to people is a waste because every dollar given must come from somewhere else. And no, Obama does not have a stash somewhere. So money given to unproductive people must come from productive people. How does that make sense?

Not really that true, Rabbi.

I agree that every dollar given must come from somewhere else, but I disagree (very much so) with your assessment that it's always "a waste”....

Why?

When it comes down to affording the basic necessities of life (food, water, home), some folks have a vast overabundance of $$$’s compared to others. Essentially, what this means is that some people can afford all the things they need to live, afford many of the (reasonable) things they want, have the ability to save money, and still have a reasonable amount leftover to donate to others.

So we end up with a situation where the:

a.) Impact of the tax on the donor is extremely minimal with regards to quality of life.
b.) Impact of the tax on the receiver is measurably beneficial; sometimes lifesaving, in fact.

What occurs is a net benefit to society, just by shuffling some money from person A to person B.

Here’s another example. For me, donating $50/year to an orphanage results in virtually no measurable negative impact on my life. That money, however, will have a rather measurable positive impact on the orphanage. Result? Net benefit to society.

.
.

 

[hortysir]

Think about what life would be like under the liberal socialist dream of equal income for the masses. It would accomplish one thing though, the illegal aliens would stop trying to get to America.

No one's arguing for equal pay. Most "left" posters here are just concerned about the widening gap of wealth distribution within the United States.

Imagine a vast, bountiful island full of resources that hosts a population of 1,000 people. If you model the island off of the United States today, about 10 folks would claim ~35% of the ENTIRE BOUNTY (wealth) for themselves. The next 90 folks would claim an additional ~35% or so.

This leaves us with a situation where 100 people on the island control over 70% of all of the island resources, leaving the remaining 900 to fend for the remaining 30%. The bottom 500 folks share in only 3% of the bounty.

Why might this be bad? In my opinion, I think for a few reasons. Here are two:

1.) instability. As those 10 folks continue to horde more and more of the wealth, the bottom 990 people will become increasingly more agitated and hostile. Eventually, some sort of 'revolution' will become inevitable, and the country (or island) will be racked with (potentially) violent turmoil.

2.) inefficiency. If our finest schools, educations, and resources are accessible to only a tiny portion of the population, then we will be without a doubt missing out on harvesting the true potential of the entire population at hand. A child - for example - could be a genius. However, because his family was poor, let's say he was forced to drop out of school and take a low-paying job at a gas station. Wasted potential. If you educate a pool of 1,000 students you are likelier to have a much smarter "top ten" then if you educate a pool of only 10 students.


Any thoughts?


.

Makes compete sense to me, but then I'm sure the neocon's here on the boards will find something wrong with it and if not they'll make something up.

#1. Kevin's scenario is completely skewed to deliver his desired result.
Where is the model, for the inhabitants of his island, to work towards getting their share?
Nevermind the false premise that there is a limited supply of wealth, in this economy, to go around.

#2? Define "neo-con", Ford. Without Google help.

 

[DGS49]

It serves no purpose to make general statements about how "the Poor" spend whatever money they are given through government assistance. Every individual has his or her own needs and desires.

No one yearns to see Americans starving in the streets for lack of food and shelter. The issue is how to structure "help" in such a way that those receiving it are incentivized to wean themselves from the government's teat.

It is also a fair conclusion that "everyone" wants to work and support themselves, but our culture has created unrealistic expectations among the non-working population (aka "the Underclass"), and it seems that they would like jobs where they don't have to work very hard, and can start at a "living wage." Despite the fact that they have no skills or work history that would induce an employer to pay them at that level.

It is a failure of the American culture to discourage (and even stigmatize) illegitimacy, to encourage people to take advantage of the free public education that is offered, and to work hard and be self-reliant. Minimum Wage is certainly not a "living wage," but who ever said that employers should be required to pay according to their employees' needs? This ain't the Soviet [fucking] Union. But two (2) people working minimum wage jobs and seeking out as much overtime as they can get...(I've been there)...is a path to the middle class. If you are a good worker, you CANNOT remain at minimum wage for long, unless you are at the same time monumentally stupid.

And the example (cited above) of immigrants coming to this country and making a success is not to be ignored. In my wife's family (from southern Italy) there are literally scores of families that came over here with NOTHING at all, and by helping each other out, starting small landscaping companies, doing side jobs, and so forth, they have all brought themselves into the middle class - with NO government handouts of any kind, for the most part.

It was said above that, "No country can long survive with the majority of it's wealth in the hands of a few." I submit that this is childish nonsense. EVERY country has the majority of its wealth (and power) in the hands of a relative few. The question is, do the society and the government allow for upward mobility, or is it artificially suppressed by regulation, large-scale nepotism and things like that. In the U.S., there are no such obstacles, and we have constant examples of people doing fantastically well without any family money or other apparent advantages - other than a willingness to work hard and take intelligent chances.

Unfortunately, we are in a fucking real-life Depression right now, and there are a ton of would-be hard-working bastards out there who can't seem to catch a break.

Even more unfortunately, it seems that no one has the slightest idea what to do about it. Even the people who are posting on this thread.

 

[rightwinger]

Giving money to people is a waste because every dollar given must come from somewhere else. And no, Obama does not have a stash somewhere. So money given to unproductive people must come from productive people. How does that make sense?

Isn't that true with every dollar we spend? Some people benefit more than others and some do not benefit at all

It is part of belonging to a society and we belong to the most productive society of them all

 

[DGS49]

Dear Hortysir:

The total amount of wealth in the U.S. is infinitely flexible. People create wealth every day by making things, improving real estate, combining one thing and another to make a product that is worth more than the sum of the two items individually.

Your "island" example presumes a fixed total wealth, which is not the case in real life.

As I said above, as long as people are not prevented by public policy from being successful or creating wealth, the government has done its job, and should stay out of it.

 

[The Rabbi]

Giving money to people is a waste because every dollar given must come from somewhere else. And no, Obama does not have a stash somewhere. So money given to unproductive people must come from productive people. How does that make sense?

Not really that true, Rabbi.

I agree that every dollar given must come from somewhere else, but I disagree (very much so) with your assessment that it's always "a waste”....

Why?

When it comes down to affording the basic necessities of life (food, water, home), some folks have a vast overabundance of $$$’s compared to others. Essentially, what this means is that some people can afford all the things they need to live, afford many of the (reasonable) things they want, have the ability to save money, and still have a reasonable amount leftover to donate to others.

So we end up with a situation where the:

a.) Impact of the tax on the donor is extremely minimal with regards to quality of life.
b.) Impact of the tax on the receiver is measurably beneficial; sometimes lifesaving, in fact.

What occurs is a net benefit to society, just by shuffling some money from person A to person B.

Here’s another example. For me, donating $50/year to an orphanage results in virtually no measurable negative impact on my life. That money, however, will have a rather measurable positive impact on the orphanage. Result? Net benefit to society.

.
.

We're not talking about affording the basic necessities of life (and most people at the bottom struggle with obesity, not hunger). We are talking about transfer payments for goodies of one sort or another. The money is basically thrown away. Your charitable contribution is far different in being voluntary, and more efficient.

 

[KevinWestern]

#1. Kevin's scenario is completely skewed to deliver his desired result.
Where is the model, for the inhabitants of his island, to work towards getting their share?
Nevermind the false premise that there is a limited supply of wealth, in this economy, to go around.

#2? Define "neo-con", Ford. Without Google help.

The purpose of my post was simply to point out that excessive wealth inequality - as a % of the total - can lead to bad things for a society.

Yes, wealth can be created and destroyed (and does not come in limited supply), but that still doesn't eradicate the fact that at any given snapshot in time there is a somewhat finite supply of wealth that exists at that moment, and that there does exist an optimum distribution % across the society. Finding that optimum % and reaching that optimum % is a monumental challenge.

Perhaps we can start with trying to make some improvements. Here's one driver of excessive wealth inequality (in my opinion):

1.) Big Business Interests in Washington. I think those who are rich enjoy unparalleled access to our politicians, and are afforded too many tools (like Super PACs and billion dollar elections) to allow them to coax elected officials into become little slave puppets. Let's face it, politicians spend 30% of their time raising money, and they need money. Each term, they must face the choice to either (a) please their donors or (b) buy a plane ticket home when they lose the election.

The powerful interests get their way (with regards to how laws are crafted), and smaller interests get snubbed. The rich get richer, and the poor get poorer. I DO think this problem can be solved through campaign finance reform and perhaps a few amendments to the Constitution. However the bigger problem is, the two shit parties that are in power now will NOT be leading the charge; they are too far entangled in the madness.

There's many more examples, but I'm going to end here.

.

 

[hortysir]

Dear Hortysir:

The total amount of wealth in the U.S. is infinitely flexible. People create wealth every day by making things, improving real estate, combining one thing and another to make a product that is worth more than the sum of the two items individually.

Your "island" example presumes a fixed total wealth, which is not the case in real life.

As I said above, as long as people are not prevented by public policy from being successful or creating wealth, the government has done its job, and should stay out of it.

You mis-spelled KevinWestern

That was his "island" example, and you've merely repeated my point

 

[DGS49]

Pop Quiz:

Warren Buffet wants to "spend" 100 million dollars in the way that provides the greatest benefit to Society. These are his options:

(1) Send the IRS an extra $100,000,000.00 with his next tax return (this is permissible under U.S. law); or

(2) Send a check for $100,000,000.00 to the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, where it will be distributed to various charitable initiatives; or

(3) Go out and purchase American-made goods and services (boats, cars, furniture, artworks, golf lessons, etc) having a total cost of $100,000,000.00.

Which of the three options will provide the greatest benefit to Society. And why?

 

[Katzndogz]

You are accusing the poor of lack of ambition and envy..completely avoiding the primary reason for the income gap, GREED. How many $billions did our government give the bankers and what do you think would have happened if they'd given that money to those who would spend it instead?

As you know, I volunteer at a local church and give out lunches every monday. Most of the people we see are having hard times, some through choice, other because of things done to them...we lost one of our regulars today due to pneumonia. He was not even 30. His whole life ahead of him and no job no matter how much he tried looking. Of course, it's hard to get hired when you have no address.

I'll bet a lot of you are now thinking how good it is that this young man is gone...no more hand outs for him....I pity you.

Giving money to the poor has the same effect as dumping it ito the ocean. Nothing. The poor spend it, mostly on cheap junk made in foreign countries. They don't invest it, they don't put it to work. They won't even use it to buy textbooks for school. Give the poor money and they'll buy Nikes for $200.00 made in Bangladesh and Ipads made in China.

My old landlord came here from Greece at the age of 14 and got a job in a garment sweatshop (how many American poor are willing to work in a sweatshop). In his off hours he worked for FREE at a tailor shop (How many American poor will work for free) just to get a few skills. He saved every cent he made. (How many poor are willing to give up the beer, the pot, the tv sets to save money?) When he got good enough he opened a small tailor shop of his own and lived in the back. He saved everything and bought a house. He didn't live in the house. He rented it out. When he married, he and his wife lived and worked in the tailor shop and bought another house that they didn't live in. They continued to live in the back of the tailor shop and rented the house out.

Today he's part of the 1%. He lives in a sprawling mansion in Rancho Palos Verdes. He lives off investments and spends his time on cruises all over the world. I know many like him. No American "poor" who complain because they can't find a job no matter how hard they look, but foreigners.

I will NOT help people stay poor. I won't feed them, give them money, clothe them, I'll throw it away in the trash before I help the poor stay poor.

The primary cause of poverty isn't the greed of the rich. It's the greed of the poor.

Bulcrap...they spend the money on food and rent and utilities, hardly things that come from China. Do some take advantage of the system? Yeah, mostly those illegal immigrants who sneak across our border and have kids then claim they aren't married while their husband works under the table. They send their money home so it can't be traced and are actually wealthier than some of our wealthiest people, especially when they go back to their own country.

It's the middleclass that's been losing ground....we need our middleclass to become a strong society again. I'm so glad you would rather the poor starve and die than give them money or help to become productive members of society, when the revolution starts, I hope you are one of the first to go, though in reality I know you will somehow survive and make it seem as though it was your idea.

No country can long survive with the majority of it's wealth in the hands of a few.

Oh, and immigrants who come here can get help not available to American citizens. Russians got low interest loans to purchase business when they then ran for 5 years tax free, the end of 5 years, they brought over their brother, or another relative, sold it to him, making a fortune and the brother then ran the business for 5 years tax free while paying for it with a low interest loan from our government. Ever wonder why businesses run by foreigners change hands so often? That's why.

It's also, probably, the main reason your Greek friend was able to advance as he did while most American citizens are tied to the bottom rung of the ladder with most of the middle rungs missing.

While my husband was unemployed and I was looking for work, I was astounded to find an organization paid by our tax dollars whose only purpose was in helping the Russians learn how to use our system. No such organization exists for American citizens..needless to say, they didn't hire me, and yeah, if I could have gotten the job I would have worked there, hating it all the time. It took me more than a year to find a job back then, the first time in my life it took me more than 2 weeks to find a job. When I found one, I kept it for a year and a half and then it was sent to India. So glad you didn't spend ONE penny to help us. I thank God every day for our luck and our family and our neighbors and friends, without which, we would have lost EVERYTHING. At the moment, I am also thanking God that you're not my neighbor.

Oh please. The poor live in subsidized housing, get subsidized utilities, and free cell phones. Not only do they get food stamps but they don't have to even buy food in the first place. If poor immigrants come here and suck off the system, it's because they successfully became the army of poor.

The middle class is disappearing because the life is being sucked out of them to provide for more and more and MORE poor who are demanding more for less. We have an overbearing government run by liberals who believe in equality at the very lowest common denominator.

If you lost everything, it wasn't because of rich people, it was because of the crushing burdens of liberalsim. It may come as a news flash, but there is no secret cabal of rich people plotting to make you poor. Rich people simply do not care if you get rich or not. If you make a fortune to them, it's someone to play golf with. They don't see your wealth as depriving them of wealth. Only liberals believe that. Only a liberal government will enforce it.