Inequality graphics

[Luddly Neddite]

9 Out Of 10 Americans Are Completely Wrong About This Mind-Blowing Fact | The Mind Unleashed

Divided we fall and that's what they want.

 

[DGS49]

Notice the sloppy thinking and use of language. He muddies the distinction between "wealth" and "income" - two completely different things.

He uses the curious and highly judgmental word, "equitable" to describe what he claims to be the best distribution of "wealth."

In most peoples' view (I suspect) it would be "equitable" for a fairly large swath of the population to have no wealth at all, or even negative wealth, if possible. They produce nothing and live off the hard work of everyone else.

Further, most people would want the most productive people to have a large share of the wealth, even if it goes far beyond their proportion of the population.

Most would agree, I suspect that the non-productive blood suckers like "bankers," lawyers, and Miley Cyrus should have nothing at all.

 

[oldfart]

Most would agree, I suspect that the non-productive blood suckers like "bankers," lawyers, and Miley Cyrus should have nothing at all.

Lots of luck in carrying out that program.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

The thread so stupid Luddly had to post it twice.

The truth about inequality - US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

 

[The Rabbi]

The thread so stupid Luddly had to post it twice.

The truth about inequality - US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

We never heard about inequality under Bush because people were working and earning money. SO they didnt care what others did. Now, Obama's policies have reduced the number of working Americans so they sit around and wonder why they are poor. And the Dems tell them they are poor because those rich people over there control all the wealth and all we have to do is take it from them.

 

[SteadyMercury]

Now, Obama's policies have reduced the number of working Americans so they sit around and wonder why they are poor.

Oh yeah it was definitely the policies of someone sworn in in 2009 that started this mess.

 

[The Rabbi]

Now, Obama's policies have reduced the number of working Americans so they sit around and wonder why they are poor.

Oh yeah it was definitely the policies of someone sworn in in 2009 that started this mess.

You're such a moron. Really. Go kill yourself and save everyone else the hassle of reading your idiotic, ill informed posts.
More people were working when Bush left office than today. Fact

 

[DGS49]

I think we have reached the point where anyone using the "unemployment rate" to "prove" something is practicing nothing more than intentional deception. Not since the 1930'a has it been common for people to just give up looking in such large numbers, because the economy is so bad in many parts of the country.

We have The President and his entire political party, who don't know the difference between a new Government job - which sucks resources out of the economy, and a private sector job, which contributes to the economy and to tax revenues.

It's pathetic, really.

 

[SteadyMercury]

You're such a moron. Really. Go kill yourself and save everyone else the hassle of reading your idiotic, ill informed posts.

Aww is wittle wabbi having a tantwum?

I'll try to explain it like I'm talking to a 5th grader, so I'm talking to you: clearly the unemployment trend started under Bush, so you asinine belief that all was well on the unemployment front while Bush was president is misplaced.

Now back to your pacifier.

 

[The Rabbi]

You're such a moron. Really. Go kill yourself and save everyone else the hassle of reading your idiotic, ill informed posts.

Aww is wittle wabbi having a tantwum?

I'll try to explain it like I'm talking to a 5th grader, so I'm talking to you: clearly the unemployment trend started under Bush, so you asinine belief that all was well on the unemployment front while Bush was president is misplaced.

Now back to your pacifier.

I wonderd how stupid you could really be. You've exceeded my expectations.
Unemployment is not the measure we're talking about here. We are talking about people simply not working, which is not the same thing. Many more people were working under Bush, even the day he left office, than are working today after 5 years of Obamanomics.

 

[SteadyMercury]

Unemployment is not the measure we're talking about here. We are talking about people simply not working, which is not the same thing.

They are clearly related, you just don't want to admit it because it isn't convenient to your puddle deep partisan view of the world.

 

[Two Thumbs]

how does having less money make me unequal?

do libs think rich people are better?

 

[SteadyMercury]

Divided we fall and that's what they want.

Who? How exactly do you think people with lots of money will benefit if people become divided and fall?

 

[The Rabbi]

Unemployment is not the measure we're talking about here. We are talking about people simply not working, which is not the same thing.

They are clearly related, you just don't want to admit it because it isn't convenient to your puddle deep partisan view of the world.

I didnt say they werent related. BUt it is irrelevant. Because the meaningful measure is how many people are working. And fewer are working today than the day Bush left office. You can't admit that, because it shows that Obama's economic policies have been a disaster. So you throw stupid shit around and hope no one notices. Too bad. We all notice you're an idiot.

 

[SteadyMercury]

Because the meaningful measure is how many people are working.

Hah hah that is great, the tool who takes partisan fucktard to such a level that he's making sweeping statements about how everyone felt under certain presidents is now lecturing about what meaningful measures are. Can it get any better than that?

Yeah Rabbi, everyone was working and earning money under Bush as the unemployment rate crept past 7%. Then it all changed overnight when Obama was elected.

 

[The Rabbi]

Because the meaningful measure is how many people are working.

Hah hah that is great, the tool who takes partisan fucktard to such a level that he's making sweeping statements about how everyone felt under certain presidents is now lecturing about what meaningful measures are. Can it get any better than that?

Yeah Rabbi, everyone was working and earning money under Bush as the unemployment rate crept past 7%. Then it all changed overnight when Obama was elected.

Translation: I cannot refute the facts.

 

[SteadyMercury]

Yeah I know, I failed to refute your "fact" that we never heard about inequality when Bush was president.

I might have trouble disproving you have a pet unicorn too.

 

[SteadyMercury]

We never heard about inequality under Bush because people were working and earning money.

Yeah dude, are you having fun living in alternate reality land?

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/29/business/29tax.html?_r=0

Income inequality grew significantly in 2005, with the top 1 percent of Americans — those with incomes that year of more than $348,000 — receiving their largest share of national income since 1928, analysis of newly released tax data shows. The top 10 percent, roughly those earning more than $100,000, also reached a level of income share not seen since before the Depression.

I could easily post a few dozen more, but you get the point dumbass.

 

[The Rabbi]

We never heard about inequality under Bush because people were working and earning money.

Yeah dude, are you having fun living in alternate reality land?

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/29/business/29tax.html?_r=0

Income inequality grew significantly in 2005, with the top 1 percent of Americans — those with incomes that year of more than $348,000 — receiving their largest share of national income since 1928, analysis of newly released tax data shows. The top 10 percent, roughly those earning more than $100,000, also reached a level of income share not seen since before the Depression.

I could easily post a few dozen more, but you get the point dumbass.

There are always isolated people talking about such things. But no one was seriously using inequality as a class warfare issue to drum up anger. That happened under Obama.
I realize subtely is beyond you. Because you're stupid.

 

[The Rabbi]

Yeah I know, I failed to refute your "fact" that we never heard about inequality when Bush was president.

I might have trouble disproving you have a pet unicorn too.

You certainly weren't able to disprove that more people were working under Bush than under Obama.