"Just get by President..the only way is to grab larger slice of the economic pie..."

[JoeNormal]

That makes NO SENSE!
YES the GDP per person may have doubled! NO question. If fact here are the numbers:

When you started in 1974 the GDP was 5,390,200,000,000. Today it is $15,759,000,000,000 which is actually tripled!

BUT then you put this stupid statement "hasn't risen by any significant degree for the bottom half of the population"!
You are mixing up comparatives!
How can you subtract half the population and then get an AVERAGE?
The statement is: The GDP has tripled in the 40 years per person!"
Stop there because that is a true statement.
But injecting then "let's drop the top half of the population" .. that makes the bottom half what???

Makes no sense!

Now think for a second.. I know it's hard to when you make so much money....!

Using these FACTS...

• GDP in 2009 dollars Population GDP per capita in 2009 dollars.
• 1800 $ 7,994,000,000 Population 5,297,000 GDP per capita $ 1,509
• 1900 $ 456,861,000,000 Population 76,094,000 GDP per capita $ 6,003
• 2013 $15,759,000,000,000 Population 316,465,000 GDP per capita $49,797

Measuring Worth - GDP result.

From 1800 to 1900 the population grew by 70 million or 1,337% growth in 100 years.
BUT the GDP grew from $7.9 billion in 1800 to $422 billion in 1900 or 5,615%.
And from 1900 to 2013 the population grew by 316% WHILE the GDP grew by 3,578%!
Do the math... if you can...
NOW those are the facts.
Again... quick acting like the pea brain dog eat dog mentality! Grow the pie bigger and we all are better off!

I'm trying to get you to see that the upper class has taken the productivity gains over the last 50 to 70 years and left very little of it to anyone else. Apparently, that's a lost cause. Being one of the people who has created some of those productivity gains (including the miniaturized wonders that you think compensates for this disparity), I think that's a crime. I guess as a memeber of the upper middle class, i should just feel luck that they have seen fit to share a small part of that wealth with me.

(Just a petty tiny point of criticism... don't you ever read what you write at least paying attention to the words underlined with a red dotted line?)
Your credibility is really questionable when you can't even pay attention to little red dotted lines... as if you are too important to spell correctly or you are too important
to be bothered by little details like spelling!

If you can't with the help of technology spell simple words correctly, it makes me question you credibility.

Again using class warfare! How old fashion! How dinosaur like!

But that's ok. Like the dinosaurs you are fast becoming extinct... as more and more people are recognizing that the monolithic state espoused by dinosaurs like you
IS GROWING so big that just as the dinosaurs you have become slow, unable to keep up. The monolithic federal government is feeling that strain now because
ignorant people like Obama et.al. forgot the value of the 50 states..the laboratories of governmental ideas.. the real pulse of the people.

You and your ilk are going to die out as death panels will dictate from the monolithic state you're no longer a contributor but a user.

If it weren't for people like me at 71 that sees so many opportunities... for example this morning using my skills and knowledge of the internet I have come up with
an alternative to "Angie's List". I'm registering the domain name. I've contacted some organizations that would love to tap into the growing market of
10,000 baby boomers retiring at the rate a day and based on population studies will do so for the next 19 years!

This opportunity will as my other existing businesses do several things.
Allows me to accumulate a nest egg for my granddaughter that she can use to launch her ideas!
This opportunity will also help other retiree/contributors in several ways...part time jobs, revenue sharing, opportunities for recognition!
Again..all the while helping increase the pie...not tear a piece away from someone else's piece!

But see the difference between you and me is you are bitching and moaning ... I'm doing something about it!
You are gnashing and tearing at the sliver of meat like a wild dog, complaining that other dogs have bigger pieces RATHER then finding your own niche your own
piece of the pie and making it bigger for all.
The difference between people like you and me is clear... I see the pie growing daily. You see the pie as finite. I see my piece of the pie growing. You like an
animal have to grab from some other dog's piece to get a bigger piece. You are the cliche. You are like The worn out "occupy wall street" person who rather then
use the bathroom defecated on a police car...and then forgetting he walked in the crap!
So continue to moan and grown about those evil 1%s while the small number of us (growing by the way) are looking at ways to make all our collective PIE Grow rather
then steal it like a foaming rabid dog would do!

If you must know, i'm typing this on an iPad which kinda sucks as a keyboard and there are no red lines to draw attention. But in what appears to be typical fashion for you, you miss the point in favor of minutae.

 

[healthmyths]

I'm trying to get you to see that the upper class has taken the productivity gains over the last 50 to 70 years and left very little of it to anyone else. Apparently, that's a lost cause. Being one of the people who has created some of those productivity gains (including the miniaturized wonders that you think compensates for this disparity), I think that's a crime. I guess as a memeber of the upper middle class, i should just feel luck that they have seen fit to share a small part of that wealth with me.

(Just a petty tiny point of criticism... don't you ever read what you write at least paying attention to the words underlined with a red dotted line?)
Your credibility is really questionable when you can't even pay attention to little red dotted lines... as if you are too important to spell correctly or you are too important
to be bothered by little details like spelling!

If you can't with the help of technology spell simple words correctly, it makes me question you credibility.

Again using class warfare! How old fashion! How dinosaur like!

But that's ok. Like the dinosaurs you are fast becoming extinct... as more and more people are recognizing that the monolithic state espoused by dinosaurs like you
IS GROWING so big that just as the dinosaurs you have become slow, unable to keep up. The monolithic federal government is feeling that strain now because
ignorant people like Obama et.al. forgot the value of the 50 states..the laboratories of governmental ideas.. the real pulse of the people.

You and your ilk are going to die out as death panels will dictate from the monolithic state you're no longer a contributor but a user.

If it weren't for people like me at 71 that sees so many opportunities... for example this morning using my skills and knowledge of the internet I have come up with
an alternative to "Angie's List". I'm registering the domain name. I've contacted some organizations that would love to tap into the growing market of
10,000 baby boomers retiring at the rate a day and based on population studies will do so for the next 19 years!

This opportunity will as my other existing businesses do several things.
Allows me to accumulate a nest egg for my granddaughter that she can use to launch her ideas!
This opportunity will also help other retiree/contributors in several ways...part time jobs, revenue sharing, opportunities for recognition!
Again..all the while helping increase the pie...not tear a piece away from someone else's piece!

But see the difference between you and me is you are bitching and moaning ... I'm doing something about it!
You are gnashing and tearing at the sliver of meat like a wild dog, complaining that other dogs have bigger pieces RATHER then finding your own niche your own
piece of the pie and making it bigger for all.
The difference between people like you and me is clear... I see the pie growing daily. You see the pie as finite. I see my piece of the pie growing. You like an
animal have to grab from some other dog's piece to get a bigger piece. You are the cliche. You are like The worn out "occupy wall street" person who rather then
use the bathroom defecated on a police car...and then forgetting he walked in the crap!
So continue to moan and grown about those evil 1%s while the small number of us (growing by the way) are looking at ways to make all our collective PIE Grow rather
then steal it like a foaming rabid dog would do!

If you must know, i'm typing this on an iPad which kinda sucks as a keyboard and there are no red lines to draw attention. But in what appears to be typical fashion for you, you miss the point in favor of minutae.

EXCUSES!
There is NO excuse for someone claiming to be "Being one of the people who has created some of those productivity gains" and then can't even spell "minutiae"!
What kind of sloppy work did you do that "created those productivity gains"? I mean seriously if you did programming...geez buried in some line of code is
your sloppiness!
No the point is being sloppy, you have JUMP to conclusions regarding the evil filthy rich and the down trodden, suffering POOR!
The poor that get nearly $26,000 a year in free cell phones,free food, free health, free rent, free money!

By sloppy spelling like you did with "minutiae" you illustrate how careless people are with important details.

"Sloppy" illustrated by your GUESSING..."in 40 years of working the GDP has doubled"... why make a guess?

Why not find out BEFORE you make stupid comment like that that from 1974 to 2014 GDP has TRIPLED from 5.4 trillion to $15.7 trillion!

These two illustrations of how sloppy people like you repeat a meme, a cliche, i.e. something the government has said as true and as a result
other idiots like you believe it and then we have Congress passing laws based on totally guessed flawed numbers!

1) ACA was passed because everyone like you believed Obama's "46 million "uninsured" number. Wrong!
10 million are not citizens.. 14 million due to the inefficiency of Medicaid are covered..just don't know it!
18 million who don't WANT, OR NEED health insurance are counted as part of the bogus 46 million! WRONG! WRONG! WRONG!
If those House members that voted for ACA REALIZED the enormity of the inclusion of 42 million people as "uninsured" ACA would not have passed!

2) I bet you can't tell me the difference between 1 million barrels of oil traveling 1 mile on the ocean and 700 barrels traveling one mile in a pipeline on land?
Yet YOU and millions like you simply don't fathom the enormity of the Exxon Valdez and by being concerned over possibly 2,100 barrels of oil spilt by Keystone,
you and your ilk are forcing Canada to ship to China.. 1 million barrels a day in a tanker. On the open ocean!

See these are the sloppy details that you supposedly think are "minutiae"!!! (Spelled correctly!)

So please dignify yourself by at least learning the importance of little details. Might help in your job!

 

[JoeNormal]

(Just a petty tiny point of criticism... don't you ever read what you write at least paying attention to the words underlined with a red dotted line?)
Your credibility is really questionable when you can't even pay attention to little red dotted lines... as if you are too important to spell correctly or you are too important
to be bothered by little details like spelling!

If you can't with the help of technology spell simple words correctly, it makes me question you credibility.

Again using class warfare! How old fashion! How dinosaur like!

But that's ok. Like the dinosaurs you are fast becoming extinct... as more and more people are recognizing that the monolithic state espoused by dinosaurs like you
IS GROWING so big that just as the dinosaurs you have become slow, unable to keep up. The monolithic federal government is feeling that strain now because
ignorant people like Obama et.al. forgot the value of the 50 states..the laboratories of governmental ideas.. the real pulse of the people.

You and your ilk are going to die out as death panels will dictate from the monolithic state you're no longer a contributor but a user.

If it weren't for people like me at 71 that sees so many opportunities... for example this morning using my skills and knowledge of the internet I have come up with
an alternative to "Angie's List". I'm registering the domain name. I've contacted some organizations that would love to tap into the growing market of
10,000 baby boomers retiring at the rate a day and based on population studies will do so for the next 19 years!

This opportunity will as my other existing businesses do several things.
Allows me to accumulate a nest egg for my granddaughter that she can use to launch her ideas!
This opportunity will also help other retiree/contributors in several ways...part time jobs, revenue sharing, opportunities for recognition!
Again..all the while helping increase the pie...not tear a piece away from someone else's piece!

But see the difference between you and me is you are bitching and moaning ... I'm doing something about it!
You are gnashing and tearing at the sliver of meat like a wild dog, complaining that other dogs have bigger pieces RATHER then finding your own niche your own
piece of the pie and making it bigger for all.
The difference between people like you and me is clear... I see the pie growing daily. You see the pie as finite. I see my piece of the pie growing. You like an
animal have to grab from some other dog's piece to get a bigger piece. You are the cliche. You are like The worn out "occupy wall street" person who rather then
use the bathroom defecated on a police car...and then forgetting he walked in the crap!
So continue to moan and grown about those evil 1%s while the small number of us (growing by the way) are looking at ways to make all our collective PIE Grow rather
then steal it like a foaming rabid dog would do!

If you must know, i'm typing this on an iPad which kinda sucks as a keyboard and there are no red lines to draw attention. But in what appears to be typical fashion for you, you miss the point in favor of minutae.

EXCUSES!
There is NO excuse for someone claiming to be "Being one of the people who has created some of those productivity gains" and then can't even spell "minutiae"!
What kind of sloppy work did you do that "created those productivity gains"? I mean seriously if you did programming...geez buried in some line of code is
your sloppiness!
No the point is being sloppy, you have JUMP to conclusions regarding the evil filthy rich and the down trodden, suffering POOR!
The poor that get nearly $26,000 a year in free cell phones,free food, free health, free rent, free money!

By sloppy spelling like you did with "minutiae" you illustrate how careless people are with important details.

"Sloppy" illustrated by your GUESSING..."in 40 years of working the GDP has doubled"... why make a guess?

Why not find out BEFORE you make stupid comment like that that from 1974 to 2014 GDP has TRIPLED from 5.4 trillion to $15.7 trillion!

These two illustrations of how sloppy people like you repeat a meme, a cliche, i.e. something the government has said as true and as a result
other idiots like you believe it and then we have Congress passing laws based on totally guessed flawed numbers!

1) ACA was passed because everyone like you believed Obama's "46 million "uninsured" number. Wrong!
10 million are not citizens.. 14 million due to the inefficiency of Medicaid are covered..just don't know it!
18 million who don't WANT, OR NEED health insurance are counted as part of the bogus 46 million! WRONG! WRONG! WRONG!
If those House members that voted for ACA REALIZED the enormity of the inclusion of 42 million people as "uninsured" ACA would not have passed!

2) I bet you can't tell me the difference between 1 million barrels of oil traveling 1 mile on the ocean and 700 barrels traveling one mile in a pipeline on land?
Yet YOU and millions like you simply don't fathom the enormity of the Exxon Valdez and by being concerned over possibly 2,100 barrels of oil spilt by Keystone,
you and your ilk are forcing Canada to ship to China.. 1 million barrels a day in a tanker. On the open ocean!

See these are the sloppy details that you supposedly think are "minutiae"!!! (Spelled correctly!)

So please dignify yourself by at least learning the importance of little details. Might help in your job!

Ever heard of inflation?

Run along now, i'm sure that some kids are playing on your lawn and you need to tell them to get off.

 

[Dad2three]

Obama said he remembered what it felt like to be struggling to figure out
“how you lead a good life and raise your kids, not looking to get wildly wealthy…
trying to make ends meet.”
Obama: GOP pushing ?phony scandals? | TheHill

All of the above said.... at a dinner that raised easily $600,000!

Approximately 60 guests attended the fundraiser, Obama’s sixth for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee this year. Tickets ranged from $10,000 per person to $32,400 per couple, and high profile Democratic guests included former Vice President Mondale, Minnesota Gov. Mark Dayton, and Minnesota Reps. Keith Ellison, Betty McCollum, and Rick Nolan.

How f..king hypocritical!

So here is Obama telling "wildly wealthy" people that the President is telling the middle class not to take the wealth from these wildly wealthy people!
See idiots like the donors and Obama supporters believe in a zero sum game, i.e. that there is a finite pot of gold and only the "wildly wealthy" have
a right to it!

YUP Obama believes the ECONOMIC PIE never gets bigger ONLY the slices get bigger.
In other words for you that still don't comprehend..
Obama and others think there is a limited amount.. which IS NOT!
Obama and others think the ONLY way to get "wildly wealthy" is by taking BIGGER slices of the fixed pie.

Proof Obama and other fixed pie believers are totally wrong.

The gross domestic product (GDP) per person in the United States....

• GDP in 2005 dollars Population GDP per capita in 2005 dollars.
• 1800 $ 12,987 5,297,000 $ 1,396
• 1900 $ 422,843 76,094,000 $ 5,556
• 2009 12,987,400 307,483,000 $42,247

Measuring Worth - GDP result.
Does Obama and other Limited size economic pie believers understand that every single American's gross domestic product share
grew 3,025% over 209 years on 14% a year.
The average family in the USA in has a net worth of $686,586.
The net worth of U.s. households in 2013 was $80.7 trillion.
United States household:117,538,000

U.S. Household Net Worth Hits Record High - WSJ

If I 'make' a million dollars, I accumulated money from other people. I'm not actually producing cash, I'm acquiring theirs. Therefore, others have collectively lost a million dollars of purchasing power to me.

These people can't go demand new money just because I have all of their money.

They go broke, I get rich, and income inequality is a thing.


Wealth is a Zero-Sum Game

Conservative damagogues like Limbaugh have been able to convince the public that the huge incomes of the wealthiest Americans are irrelevant to those who make moderate-to-low incomes. They even suggest that the more money the wealthiest Americans make, the more wealth will trickle down to the lower classes.

If you've swallowed this line of conservative garbage, get ready to vomit. As all conservative economists know, and deny to the public that they know, wealth is a zero-sum game. That is true at both the front end—when income is divided up, and the back end—when it is spent.

The Front End of Zero-Sum: Dividing the Loot

There is only so much corporate income in a given year. The more of that income that is used to pay workers, the less profit the corporation makes. The less profit, the less the stock goes up. The less the stock goes up, the less the CEO and the investors make. It’s as simple as that. Profit equals income minus expenses. No more, no less. Subtract the right side of the equation from the left side and the answer is always zero. Hence the term, “zero-sum.”

The Zero-sum Nature of economics



80% of the population owns 5% of the wealth.

Who Rules America: Wealth, Income, and Power

The middle class has been eviscerated.

 

[Dad2three]

(Just a petty tiny point of criticism... don't you ever read what you write at least paying attention to the words underlined with a red dotted line?)
Your credibility is really questionable when you can't even pay attention to little red dotted lines... as if you are too important to spell correctly or you are too important
to be bothered by little details like spelling!

If you can't with the help of technology spell simple words correctly, it makes me question you credibility.

Again using class warfare! How old fashion! How dinosaur like!

But that's ok. Like the dinosaurs you are fast becoming extinct... as more and more people are recognizing that the monolithic state espoused by dinosaurs like you
IS GROWING so big that just as the dinosaurs you have become slow, unable to keep up. The monolithic federal government is feeling that strain now because
ignorant people like Obama et.al. forgot the value of the 50 states..the laboratories of governmental ideas.. the real pulse of the people.

You and your ilk are going to die out as death panels will dictate from the monolithic state you're no longer a contributor but a user.

If it weren't for people like me at 71 that sees so many opportunities... for example this morning using my skills and knowledge of the internet I have come up with
an alternative to "Angie's List". I'm registering the domain name. I've contacted some organizations that would love to tap into the growing market of
10,000 baby boomers retiring at the rate a day and based on population studies will do so for the next 19 years!

This opportunity will as my other existing businesses do several things.
Allows me to accumulate a nest egg for my granddaughter that she can use to launch her ideas!
This opportunity will also help other retiree/contributors in several ways...part time jobs, revenue sharing, opportunities for recognition!
Again..all the while helping increase the pie...not tear a piece away from someone else's piece!

But see the difference between you and me is you are bitching and moaning ... I'm doing something about it!
You are gnashing and tearing at the sliver of meat like a wild dog, complaining that other dogs have bigger pieces RATHER then finding your own niche your own
piece of the pie and making it bigger for all.
The difference between people like you and me is clear... I see the pie growing daily. You see the pie as finite. I see my piece of the pie growing. You like an
animal have to grab from some other dog's piece to get a bigger piece. You are the cliche. You are like The worn out "occupy wall street" person who rather then
use the bathroom defecated on a police car...and then forgetting he walked in the crap!
So continue to moan and grown about those evil 1%s while the small number of us (growing by the way) are looking at ways to make all our collective PIE Grow rather
then steal it like a foaming rabid dog would do!

If you must know, i'm typing this on an iPad which kinda sucks as a keyboard and there are no red lines to draw attention. But in what appears to be typical fashion for you, you miss the point in favor of minutae.

EXCUSES!
There is NO excuse for someone claiming to be "Being one of the people who has created some of those productivity gains" and then can't even spell "minutiae"!
What kind of sloppy work did you do that "created those productivity gains"? I mean seriously if you did programming...geez buried in some line of code is
your sloppiness!
No the point is being sloppy, you have JUMP to conclusions regarding the evil filthy rich and the down trodden, suffering POOR!
The poor that get nearly $26,000 a year in free cell phones,free food, free health, free rent, free money!

By sloppy spelling like you did with "minutiae" you illustrate how careless people are with important details.

"Sloppy" illustrated by your GUESSING..."in 40 years of working the GDP has doubled"... why make a guess?

Why not find out BEFORE you make stupid comment like that that from 1974 to 2014 GDP has TRIPLED from 5.4 trillion to $15.7 trillion!

These two illustrations of how sloppy people like you repeat a meme, a cliche, i.e. something the government has said as true and as a result
other idiots like you believe it and then we have Congress passing laws based on totally guessed flawed numbers!

1) ACA was passed because everyone like you believed Obama's "46 million "uninsured" number. Wrong!
10 million are not citizens.. 14 million due to the inefficiency of Medicaid are covered..just don't know it!
18 million who don't WANT, OR NEED health insurance are counted as part of the bogus 46 million! WRONG! WRONG! WRONG!
If those House members that voted for ACA REALIZED the enormity of the inclusion of 42 million people as "uninsured" ACA would not have passed!

2) I bet you can't tell me the difference between 1 million barrels of oil traveling 1 mile on the ocean and 700 barrels traveling one mile in a pipeline on land?
Yet YOU and millions like you simply don't fathom the enormity of the Exxon Valdez and by being concerned over possibly 2,100 barrels of oil spilt by Keystone,
you and your ilk are forcing Canada to ship to China.. 1 million barrels a day in a tanker. On the open ocean!

See these are the sloppy details that you supposedly think are "minutiae"!!! (Spelled correctly!)

So please dignify yourself by at least learning the importance of little details. Might help in your job!

RIGHT WING GARBAGE. Half of AmeriKa gets 11% of the pie, down from nearly 18% in 1980, almost $5,000 per family


Andrew Mellon had a few distinctly progressive ideas. Of particular note, he suggested taxing "earned" income from wages and salaries more lightly that "unearned" income from investments. As he argued:


The fairness of taxing more lightly income from wages, salaries or from investments is beyond question. In the first case, the income is uncertain and limited in duration; sickness or death destroys it and old age diminishes it; in the other, the source of income continues; the income may be disposed of during a man's life and it descends to his heirs.

Surely we can afford to make a distinction between the people whose only capital is their mental and physical energy and the people whose income is derived from investments. Such a distinction would mean much to millions of American workers and would be an added inspiration to the man who must provide a competence during his few productive years to care for himself and his family when his earnings capacity is at an end.



Tax History Project -- The Republican Roots of New Deal Tax Policy

 

[Dad2three]

That makes NO SENSE!
YES the GDP per person may have doubled! NO question. If fact here are the numbers:

When you started in 1974 the GDP was 5,390,200,000,000. Today it is $15,759,000,000,000 which is actually tripled!

BUT then you put this stupid statement "hasn't risen by any significant degree for the bottom half of the population"!
You are mixing up comparatives!
How can you subtract half the population and then get an AVERAGE?
The statement is: The GDP has tripled in the 40 years per person!"
Stop there because that is a true statement.
But injecting then "let's drop the top half of the population" .. that makes the bottom half what???

Makes no sense!

Now think for a second.. I know it's hard to when you make so much money....!

Using these FACTS...

• GDP in 2009 dollars Population GDP per capita in 2009 dollars.
• 1800 $ 7,994,000,000 Population 5,297,000 GDP per capita $ 1,509
• 1900 $ 456,861,000,000 Population 76,094,000 GDP per capita $ 6,003
• 2013 $15,759,000,000,000 Population 316,465,000 GDP per capita $49,797

Measuring Worth - GDP result.

From 1800 to 1900 the population grew by 70 million or 1,337% growth in 100 years.
BUT the GDP grew from $7.9 billion in 1800 to $422 billion in 1900 or 5,615%.
And from 1900 to 2013 the population grew by 316% WHILE the GDP grew by 3,578%!
Do the math... if you can...
NOW those are the facts.
Again... quick acting like the pea brain dog eat dog mentality! Grow the pie bigger and we all are better off!

I'm trying to get you to see that the upper class has taken the productivity gains over the last 50 to 70 years and left very little of it to anyone else. Apparently, that's a lost cause. Being one of the people who has created some of those productivity gains (including the miniaturized wonders that you think compensates for this disparity), I think that's a crime. I guess as a memeber of the upper middle class, i should just feel luck that they have seen fit to share a small part of that wealth with me.

(Just a petty tiny point of criticism... don't you ever read what you write at least paying attention to the words underlined with a red dotted line?)
Your credibility is really questionable when you can't even pay attention to little red dotted lines... as if you are too important to spell correctly or you are too important
to be bothered by little details like spelling!

If you can't with the help of technology spell simple words correctly, it makes me question you credibility.

Again using class warfare! How old fashion! How dinosaur like!

But that's ok. Like the dinosaurs you are fast becoming extinct... as more and more people are recognizing that the monolithic state espoused by dinosaurs like you
IS GROWING so big that just as the dinosaurs you have become slow, unable to keep up. The monolithic federal government is feeling that strain now because
ignorant people like Obama et.al. forgot the value of the 50 states..the laboratories of governmental ideas.. the real pulse of the people.

You and your ilk are going to die out as death panels will dictate from the monolithic state you're no longer a contributor but a user.

If it weren't for people like me at 71 that sees so many opportunities... for example this morning using my skills and knowledge of the internet I have come up with
an alternative to "Angie's List". I'm registering the domain name. I've contacted some organizations that would love to tap into the growing market of
10,000 baby boomers retiring at the rate a day and based on population studies will do so for the next 19 years!

This opportunity will as my other existing businesses do several things.
Allows me to accumulate a nest egg for my granddaughter that she can use to launch her ideas!
This opportunity will also help other retiree/contributors in several ways...part time jobs, revenue sharing, opportunities for recognition!
Again..all the while helping increase the pie...not tear a piece away from someone else's piece!

But see the difference between you and me is you are bitching and moaning ... I'm doing something about it!
You are gnashing and tearing at the sliver of meat like a wild dog, complaining that other dogs have bigger pieces RATHER then finding your own niche your own
piece of the pie and making it bigger for all.
The difference between people like you and me is clear... I see the pie growing daily. You see the pie as finite. I see my piece of the pie growing. You like an
animal have to grab from some other dog's piece to get a bigger piece. You are the cliche. You are like The worn out "occupy wall street" person who rather then
use the bathroom defecated on a police car...and then forgetting he walked in the crap!
So continue to moan and grown about those evil 1%s while the small number of us (growing by the way) are looking at ways to make all our collective PIE Grow rather
then steal it like a foaming rabid dog would do!

The only people who are more stupid than Republicans are the people who vote for them.

 

[Dad2three]

Now I KNOW some of you supposedly compassionate feeling people that HATE the wealthy "1%" will say yea but the gap is growing bigger between
the 1% and the 99%! That is FALSE!

Everyone has made it a "1%" VS "99%" when it never never was!
There are yes 1% people. NO question.

But there are ALSO 11.8% that make up that "1%ers" "trying to get by on $100,000 to $500,000 a year in income"!
There are 20% of all households that make between $75,000 and up to $500,000!

SOI Tax Stats - Individual Statistical Tables by Size of Adjusted Gross Income

1%er Warns Fellow Plutocrats Neoliberalism Will Lead to Violent Class Revolution

Though Charles and David Koch may be grabbing the headlines promoting a 1% neo-feudal agenda, not everyone in the upper echelons of the American plutocracy is on board. Nick Hanauer, a super rich venture capitalist, recently wrote a piece condemning neoliberalism – often called “trickle-down economics” – saying the current economic system is not only unfair and causing resentment but counter-productive to a thriving middle class saying “These idiotic trickle-down policies are destroying my customer base.”


1%er Warns Fellow Plutocrats Neoliberalism Will Lead To Violent Class Revolution | FDL News Desk






The Highest-Paid CEOs Are The Worst Performers, New Study Says

Across the board, the more CEOs get paid, the worse their companies do over the next three years, according to extensive new research. This is true whether they’re CEOs at the highest end of the pay spectrum or the lowest. “The more CEOs are paid, the worse the firm does over the next three years, as far as stock performance and even accounting performance,” says one of the authors of the study, Michael Cooper of the University of Utah’s David Eccles School of Business.


The Highest-Paid CEOs Are The Worst Performers, New Study Says - Forbes


Study: The Higher the Pay, the Worse the CEO (Vocativ)
Daniel Edward Rosen looks at a study from the University of Utah, which shows that companies that pay CEOs more than $20 million a year have average annual losses over $1 billion.


The Higher the Pay, the Worse the CEO | Vocativ

Roosevelt Take: Roosevelt Institute Fellow and Director of Research Susan Holmberg and Campus Network alumna Lydia Austin look at additional ways high CEO pay distorts the economy.


Fixing a Hole: How the Tax Code for Executive Pay Distorts Economic Incentives and Burdens Taxpayers

Fixing a Hole: How the Tax Code for Executive Pay Distorts Economic Incentives and Burdens Taxpayers | Roosevelt Institute

 

[Dad2three]

Third World countries. One of the things they all had in common was a small, very rich elite, small middle class, and a large lower class. They also shared very low economic growth as a result. This has been known for at least 50 years. The US has been going in this direction for at least the last 30 years as we have gradually de-industrialized and government policies (such as trickle down economics) have promoted the shift of wealth from the lower and middle classes to the economic elite




"The greatest evils in our industrial system to-day are those which rise from the abuses of aggregated wealth; and our great problem is to overcome these evils and cut out these abuses. No one man can deal with this matter. It is the affair of the people as a whole. When aggregated wealth demands what is unfair, its immense power can be met only by the still greater power of the people as a whole, exerted in the only way it can be exerted, through the Government;..."
- Teddy Roosevelt 1910

 

[healthmyths]

If you must know, i'm typing this on an iPad which kinda sucks as a keyboard and there are no red lines to draw attention. But in what appears to be typical fashion for you, you miss the point in favor of minutae.

EXCUSES!
There is NO excuse for someone claiming to be "Being one of the people who has created some of those productivity gains" and then can't even spell "minutiae"!
What kind of sloppy work did you do that "created those productivity gains"? I mean seriously if you did programming...geez buried in some line of code is
your sloppiness!
No the point is being sloppy, you have JUMP to conclusions regarding the evil filthy rich and the down trodden, suffering POOR!
The poor that get nearly $26,000 a year in free cell phones,free food, free health, free rent, free money!

By sloppy spelling like you did with "minutiae" you illustrate how careless people are with important details.

"Sloppy" illustrated by your GUESSING..."in 40 years of working the GDP has doubled"... why make a guess?

Why not find out BEFORE you make stupid comment like that that from 1974 to 2014 GDP has TRIPLED from 5.4 trillion to $15.7 trillion!

These two illustrations of how sloppy people like you repeat a meme, a cliche, i.e. something the government has said as true and as a result
other idiots like you believe it and then we have Congress passing laws based on totally guessed flawed numbers!

1) ACA was passed because everyone like you believed Obama's "46 million "uninsured" number. Wrong!
10 million are not citizens.. 14 million due to the inefficiency of Medicaid are covered..just don't know it!
18 million who don't WANT, OR NEED health insurance are counted as part of the bogus 46 million! WRONG! WRONG! WRONG!
If those House members that voted for ACA REALIZED the enormity of the inclusion of 42 million people as "uninsured" ACA would not have passed!

2) I bet you can't tell me the difference between 1 million barrels of oil traveling 1 mile on the ocean and 700 barrels traveling one mile in a pipeline on land?
Yet YOU and millions like you simply don't fathom the enormity of the Exxon Valdez and by being concerned over possibly 2,100 barrels of oil spilt by Keystone,
you and your ilk are forcing Canada to ship to China.. 1 million barrels a day in a tanker. On the open ocean!

See these are the sloppy details that you supposedly think are "minutiae"!!! (Spelled correctly!)

So please dignify yourself by at least learning the importance of little details. Might help in your job!

Ever heard of inflation?

Run along now, i'm sure that some kids are playing on your lawn and you need to tell them to get off.

Again your reading comprehension IS really poor!
I'll repeat the numbers NOTE THEY ARE IN 2009 dollars! Meaning for you the figures ARE adjusted for INFLATION!

Using these FACTS...

• GDP in 2009 dollars Population GDP per capita in 2009 dollars.
• 1800 $ 7,994,000,000 5,297,000 $ 1,509
• 1900 $ 456,861,000,000 76,094,000 $ 6,003
• 2013 $15,759,000,000,000 316,465,000 $49,797

Measuring Worth - GDP result.

That is your retort? "Run along now..."
Once again you are showing the gross ignorance of people like you that make totally unsubstantiated,hyperbolic statements.
Why is an adult dialogue impossible for someone who bragged they were part "Being one of the people who has created some of those productivity gains (including the miniaturized wonders that you think compensates for this disparity), I think that's a crime. I guess as a memeber of the upper middle class,".
How pompous! But that's how people like you think!
You want to take care of the little poor people. Run their lives..."even though you can't even spell "member"!
You type of elitists are so happy to show how compassionate you are YET you won't help people by ENCOURAGING them to improve!
All you want to do is MAKE them more dependent! How cruel people like you are and even more how disingenuous!
Sounding all caring and compassionate for the Little people!
Disgusting.
So when YOU can cut this cliched, tired old crap about "helping the little people" and actual help people by teaching them how to fish and not just giving them a fish... maybe you can join the grown ups conversations!

 

[Dad2three]

EXCUSES!
There is NO excuse for someone claiming to be "Being one of the people who has created some of those productivity gains" and then can't even spell "minutiae"!
What kind of sloppy work did you do that "created those productivity gains"? I mean seriously if you did programming...geez buried in some line of code is
your sloppiness!
No the point is being sloppy, you have JUMP to conclusions regarding the evil filthy rich and the down trodden, suffering POOR!
The poor that get nearly $26,000 a year in free cell phones,free food, free health, free rent, free money!

By sloppy spelling like you did with "minutiae" you illustrate how careless people are with important details.

"Sloppy" illustrated by your GUESSING..."in 40 years of working the GDP has doubled"... why make a guess?

Why not find out BEFORE you make stupid comment like that that from 1974 to 2014 GDP has TRIPLED from 5.4 trillion to $15.7 trillion!

These two illustrations of how sloppy people like you repeat a meme, a cliche, i.e. something the government has said as true and as a result
other idiots like you believe it and then we have Congress passing laws based on totally guessed flawed numbers!

1) ACA was passed because everyone like you believed Obama's "46 million "uninsured" number. Wrong!
10 million are not citizens.. 14 million due to the inefficiency of Medicaid are covered..just don't know it!
18 million who don't WANT, OR NEED health insurance are counted as part of the bogus 46 million! WRONG! WRONG! WRONG!
If those House members that voted for ACA REALIZED the enormity of the inclusion of 42 million people as "uninsured" ACA would not have passed!

2) I bet you can't tell me the difference between 1 million barrels of oil traveling 1 mile on the ocean and 700 barrels traveling one mile in a pipeline on land?
Yet YOU and millions like you simply don't fathom the enormity of the Exxon Valdez and by being concerned over possibly 2,100 barrels of oil spilt by Keystone,
you and your ilk are forcing Canada to ship to China.. 1 million barrels a day in a tanker. On the open ocean!

See these are the sloppy details that you supposedly think are "minutiae"!!! (Spelled correctly!)

So please dignify yourself by at least learning the importance of little details. Might help in your job!

Ever heard of inflation?

Run along now, i'm sure that some kids are playing on your lawn and you need to tell them to get off.

Again your reading comprehension IS really poor!
I'll repeat the numbers NOTE THEY ARE IN 2009 dollars! Meaning for you the figures ARE adjusted for INFLATION!

Using these FACTS...

• GDP in 2009 dollars Population GDP per capita in 2009 dollars.
• 1800 $ 7,994,000,000 5,297,000 $ 1,509
• 1900 $ 456,861,000,000 76,094,000 $ 6,003
• 2013 $15,759,000,000,000 316,465,000 $49,797

Measuring Worth - GDP result.

That is your retort? "Run along now..."
Once again you are showing the gross ignorance of people like you that make totally unsubstantiated,hyperbolic statements.
Why is an adult dialogue impossible for someone who bragged they were part "Being one of the people who has created some of those productivity gains (including the miniaturized wonders that you think compensates for this disparity), I think that's a crime. I guess as a memeber of the upper middle class,".
How pompous! But that's how people like you think!
You want to take care of the little poor people. Run their lives..."even though you can't even spell "member"!
You type of elitists are so happy to show how compassionate you are YET you won't help people by ENCOURAGING them to improve!
All you want to do is MAKE them more dependent! How cruel people like you are and even more how disingenuous!
Sounding all caring and compassionate for the Little people!
Disgusting.
So when YOU can cut this cliched, tired old crap about "helping the little people" and actual help people by teaching them how to fish and not just giving them a fish... maybe you can join the grown ups conversations!

In 1980 the top 1% earned 8.5% of total income. In 2007 they earned 23%.

In 1980 the bottom 90% earned 68% of total income. In 2007 they earned 53%.

Summary of Latest Federal Income Tax Data | Tax Foundation

GOV'T POLICY MATTERS !!!



Why Thomas Jefferson Favored Profit Sharing
By David Cay Johnston

The founders, despite decades of rancorous disagreements about almost every other aspect of their grand experiment, agreed that America would survive and thrive only if there was widespread ownership of land and businesses.

George Washington, nine months before his inauguration as the first president, predicted that America "will be the most favorable country of any kind in the world for persons of industry and frugality, possessed of moderate capital, to inhabit." And, he continued, "it will not be less advantageous to the happiness of the lowest class of people, because of the equal distribution of property."

The second president, John Adams, feared "monopolies of land" would destroy the nation and that a business aristocracy born of inequality would manipulate voters, creating "a system of subordination to all... The capricious will of one or a very few" dominating the rest. Unless constrained, Adams wrote, "the rich and the proud" would wield economic and political power that "will destroy all the equality and liberty, with the consent and acclamations of the people themselves."

James Madison, the Constitution's main author, described inequality as an evil, saying government should prevent "an immoderate, and especially unmerited, accumulation of riches." He favored "the silent operation of laws which, without violating the rights of property, reduce extreme wealth towards a state of mediocrity, and raise extreme indigents towards a state of comfort."



Alexander Hamilton, who championed manufacturing and banking as the first Treasury secretary, also argued for widespread ownership of assets, warning in 1782 that, "whenever a discretionary power is lodged in any set of men over the property of their neighbors, they will abuse it."

Late in life, Adams, pessimistic about whether the republic would endure, wrote that the goal of the democratic government was not to help the wealthy and powerful but to achieve "the greatest happiness for the greatest number."



http://www.newsweek.com/2014/02/07/why-thomas-jefferson-favored-profit-sharing-245454.html

 

[JoeNormal]

EXCUSES!
There is NO excuse for someone claiming to be "Being one of the people who has created some of those productivity gains" and then can't even spell "minutiae"!
What kind of sloppy work did you do that "created those productivity gains"? I mean seriously if you did programming...geez buried in some line of code is
your sloppiness!
No the point is being sloppy, you have JUMP to conclusions regarding the evil filthy rich and the down trodden, suffering POOR!
The poor that get nearly $26,000 a year in free cell phones,free food, free health, free rent, free money!

By sloppy spelling like you did with "minutiae" you illustrate how careless people are with important details.

"Sloppy" illustrated by your GUESSING..."in 40 years of working the GDP has doubled"... why make a guess?

Why not find out BEFORE you make stupid comment like that that from 1974 to 2014 GDP has TRIPLED from 5.4 trillion to $15.7 trillion!

These two illustrations of how sloppy people like you repeat a meme, a cliche, i.e. something the government has said as true and as a result
other idiots like you believe it and then we have Congress passing laws based on totally guessed flawed numbers!

1) ACA was passed because everyone like you believed Obama's "46 million "uninsured" number. Wrong!
10 million are not citizens.. 14 million due to the inefficiency of Medicaid are covered..just don't know it!
18 million who don't WANT, OR NEED health insurance are counted as part of the bogus 46 million! WRONG! WRONG! WRONG!
If those House members that voted for ACA REALIZED the enormity of the inclusion of 42 million people as "uninsured" ACA would not have passed!

2) I bet you can't tell me the difference between 1 million barrels of oil traveling 1 mile on the ocean and 700 barrels traveling one mile in a pipeline on land?
Yet YOU and millions like you simply don't fathom the enormity of the Exxon Valdez and by being concerned over possibly 2,100 barrels of oil spilt by Keystone,
you and your ilk are forcing Canada to ship to China.. 1 million barrels a day in a tanker. On the open ocean!

See these are the sloppy details that you supposedly think are "minutiae"!!! (Spelled correctly!)

So please dignify yourself by at least learning the importance of little details. Might help in your job!

Ever heard of inflation?

Run along now, i'm sure that some kids are playing on your lawn and you need to tell them to get off.

Again your reading comprehension IS really poor!
I'll repeat the numbers NOTE THEY ARE IN 2009 dollars! Meaning for you the figures ARE adjusted for INFLATION!

Using these FACTS...

• GDP in 2009 dollars Population GDP per capita in 2009 dollars.
• 1800 $ 7,994,000,000 5,297,000 $ 1,509
• 1900 $ 456,861,000,000 76,094,000 $ 6,003
• 2013 $15,759,000,000,000 316,465,000 $49,797

Measuring Worth - GDP result.

That is your retort? "Run along now..."
Once again you are showing the gross ignorance of people like you that make totally unsubstantiated,hyperbolic statements.
Why is an adult dialogue impossible for someone who bragged they were part "Being one of the people who has created some of those productivity gains (including the miniaturized wonders that you think compensates for this disparity), I think that's a crime. I guess as a memeber of the upper middle class,".
How pompous! But that's how people like you think!
You want to take care of the little poor people. Run their lives..."even though you can't even spell "member"!
You type of elitists are so happy to show how compassionate you are YET you won't help people by ENCOURAGING them to improve!
All you want to do is MAKE them more dependent! How cruel people like you are and even more how disingenuous!
Sounding all caring and compassionate for the Little people!
Disgusting.
So when YOU can cut this cliched, tired old crap about "helping the little people" and actual help people by teaching them how to fish and not just giving them a fish... maybe you can join the grown ups conversations!

Well,I was just taking a WAG at how you came up with your bogus numbers. I think I know what it is now. You're looking at GDP where GDP per capita is the pertinent metric. Strange that such a key cog in the steno pool should make such a sloppy mistake.

BTW, your Angie's List pipe dream sounds a whole lot like a ghetto kid looking to make it big as a rapper. Oh well, what else do you have to do besides spend 12 hours a day on this pathetic site.

 

[healthmyths]

Ever heard of inflation?

Run along now, i'm sure that some kids are playing on your lawn and you need to tell them to get off.

Again your reading comprehension IS really poor!
I'll repeat the numbers NOTE THEY ARE IN 2009 dollars! Meaning for you the figures ARE adjusted for INFLATION!

Using these FACTS...

• GDP in 2009 dollars Population GDP per capita in 2009 dollars.
• 1800 $ 7,994,000,000 5,297,000 $ 1,509
• 1900 $ 456,861,000,000 76,094,000 $ 6,003
• 2013 $15,759,000,000,000 316,465,000 $49,797

Measuring Worth - GDP result.

That is your retort? "Run along now..."
Once again you are showing the gross ignorance of people like you that make totally unsubstantiated,hyperbolic statements.
Why is an adult dialogue impossible for someone who bragged they were part "Being one of the people who has created some of those productivity gains (including the miniaturized wonders that you think compensates for this disparity), I think that's a crime. I guess as a memeber of the upper middle class,".
How pompous! But that's how people like you think!
You want to take care of the little poor people. Run their lives..."even though you can't even spell "member"!
You type of elitists are so happy to show how compassionate you are YET you won't help people by ENCOURAGING them to improve!
All you want to do is MAKE them more dependent! How cruel people like you are and even more how disingenuous!
Sounding all caring and compassionate for the Little people!
Disgusting.
So when YOU can cut this cliched, tired old crap about "helping the little people" and actual help people by teaching them how to fish and not just giving them a fish... maybe you can join the grown ups conversations!

Well,I was just taking a WAG at how you came up with your bogus numbers. I think I know what it is now. You're looking at GDP where GDP per capita is the pertinent metric. Strange that such a key cog in the steno pool should make such a sloppy mistake.

BTW, your Angie's List pipe dream sounds a whole lot like a ghetto kid looking to make it big as a rapper. Oh well, what else do you have to do besides spend 12 hours a day on this pathetic site.

Hey your criticisms mean very very little because one of your character flaws shows up in your comments.

Like the average faux elitist who is finally trapped by the FACTS you end up with your ONLY recourse. Snide, juvenile, petty remarks about this site.
Certainly endears you to others on this site by your "pathetic" comment.

 

[jasonnfree]

Ever heard of inflation?

Run along now, i'm sure that some kids are playing on your lawn and you need to tell them to get off.

Again your reading comprehension IS really poor!
I'll repeat the numbers NOTE THEY ARE IN 2009 dollars! Meaning for you the figures ARE adjusted for INFLATION!

Using these FACTS...

• GDP in 2009 dollars Population GDP per capita in 2009 dollars.
• 1800 $ 7,994,000,000 5,297,000 $ 1,509
• 1900 $ 456,861,000,000 76,094,000 $ 6,003
• 2013 $15,759,000,000,000 316,465,000 $49,797

Measuring Worth - GDP result.

That is your retort? "Run along now..."
Once again you are showing the gross ignorance of people like you that make totally unsubstantiated,hyperbolic statements.
Why is an adult dialogue impossible for someone who bragged they were part "Being one of the people who has created some of those productivity gains (including the miniaturized wonders that you think compensates for this disparity), I think that's a crime. I guess as a memeber of the upper middle class,".
How pompous! But that's how people like you think!
You want to take care of the little poor people. Run their lives..."even though you can't even spell "member"!
You type of elitists are so happy to show how compassionate you are YET you won't help people by ENCOURAGING them to improve!
All you want to do is MAKE them more dependent! How cruel people like you are and even more how disingenuous!
Sounding all caring and compassionate for the Little people!
Disgusting.
So when YOU can cut this cliched, tired old crap about "helping the little people" and actual help people by teaching them how to fish and not just giving them a fish... maybe you can join the grown ups conversations!

In 1980 the top 1% earned 8.5% of total income. In 2007 they earned 23%.

In 1980 the bottom 90% earned 68% of total income. In 2007 they earned 53%.

Summary of Latest Federal Income Tax Data | Tax Foundation

GOV'T POLICY MATTERS !!!



Why Thomas Jefferson Favored Profit Sharing
By David Cay Johnston

The founders, despite decades of rancorous disagreements about almost every other aspect of their grand experiment, agreed that America would survive and thrive only if there was widespread ownership of land and businesses.

George Washington, nine months before his inauguration as the first president, predicted that America "will be the most favorable country of any kind in the world for persons of industry and frugality, possessed of moderate capital, to inhabit." And, he continued, "it will not be less advantageous to the happiness of the lowest class of people, because of the equal distribution of property."

The second president, John Adams, feared "monopolies of land" would destroy the nation and that a business aristocracy born of inequality would manipulate voters, creating "a system of subordination to all... The capricious will of one or a very few" dominating the rest. Unless constrained, Adams wrote, "the rich and the proud" would wield economic and political power that "will destroy all the equality and liberty, with the consent and acclamations of the people themselves."

James Madison, the Constitution's main author, described inequality as an evil, saying government should prevent "an immoderate, and especially unmerited, accumulation of riches." He favored "the silent operation of laws which, without violating the rights of property, reduce extreme wealth towards a state of mediocrity, and raise extreme indigents towards a state of comfort."



Alexander Hamilton, who championed manufacturing and banking as the first Treasury secretary, also argued for widespread ownership of assets, warning in 1782 that, "whenever a discretionary power is lodged in any set of men over the property of their neighbors, they will abuse it."

Late in life, Adams, pessimistic about whether the republic would endure, wrote that the goal of the democratic government was not to help the wealthy and powerful but to achieve "the greatest happiness for the greatest number."



http://www.newsweek.com/2014/02/07/why-thomas-jefferson-favored-profit-sharing-245454.html

David Caye Johnson is good reading for sure. The middle class does have more things now than they had in the 50's that's true, but they have less security than we had in the 50's and 60's. Most families made it on one income. Now it takes two incomes to make a living. Families are maxed out trying to make it. In California, as well as a few other states, higher education was waaaay more affordable than now. There was almost no student debt.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Ever heard of inflation?

Run along now, i'm sure that some kids are playing on your lawn and you need to tell them to get off.

Again your reading comprehension IS really poor!
I'll repeat the numbers NOTE THEY ARE IN 2009 dollars! Meaning for you the figures ARE adjusted for INFLATION!

Using these FACTS...

• GDP in 2009 dollars Population GDP per capita in 2009 dollars.
• 1800 $ 7,994,000,000 5,297,000 $ 1,509
• 1900 $ 456,861,000,000 76,094,000 $ 6,003
• 2013 $15,759,000,000,000 316,465,000 $49,797

Measuring Worth - GDP result.

That is your retort? "Run along now..."
Once again you are showing the gross ignorance of people like you that make totally unsubstantiated,hyperbolic statements.
Why is an adult dialogue impossible for someone who bragged they were part "Being one of the people who has created some of those productivity gains (including the miniaturized wonders that you think compensates for this disparity), I think that's a crime. I guess as a memeber of the upper middle class,".
How pompous! But that's how people like you think!
You want to take care of the little poor people. Run their lives..."even though you can't even spell "member"!
You type of elitists are so happy to show how compassionate you are YET you won't help people by ENCOURAGING them to improve!
All you want to do is MAKE them more dependent! How cruel people like you are and even more how disingenuous!
Sounding all caring and compassionate for the Little people!
Disgusting.
So when YOU can cut this cliched, tired old crap about "helping the little people" and actual help people by teaching them how to fish and not just giving them a fish... maybe you can join the grown ups conversations!

Well,I was just taking a WAG at how you came up with your bogus numbers. I think I know what it is now. You're looking at GDP where GDP per capita is the pertinent metric. Strange that such a key cog in the steno pool should make such a sloppy mistake.

BTW, your Angie's List pipe dream sounds a whole lot like a ghetto kid looking to make it big as a rapper. Oh well, what else do you have to do besides spend 12 hours a day on this pathetic site.

You're looking at GDP where GDP per capita is the pertinent metric

GDP in 2009 dollars Population GDP per capita in 2009 dollars.

He clearly has GDP per capita. Sloppy?

 

[Dad2three]

Again your reading comprehension IS really poor!
I'll repeat the numbers NOTE THEY ARE IN 2009 dollars! Meaning for you the figures ARE adjusted for INFLATION!

Using these FACTS...

• GDP in 2009 dollars Population GDP per capita in 2009 dollars.
• 1800 $ 7,994,000,000 5,297,000 $ 1,509
• 1900 $ 456,861,000,000 76,094,000 $ 6,003
• 2013 $15,759,000,000,000 316,465,000 $49,797

Measuring Worth - GDP result.

That is your retort? "Run along now..."
Once again you are showing the gross ignorance of people like you that make totally unsubstantiated,hyperbolic statements.
Why is an adult dialogue impossible for someone who bragged they were part "Being one of the people who has created some of those productivity gains (including the miniaturized wonders that you think compensates for this disparity), I think that's a crime. I guess as a memeber of the upper middle class,".
How pompous! But that's how people like you think!
You want to take care of the little poor people. Run their lives..."even though you can't even spell "member"!
You type of elitists are so happy to show how compassionate you are YET you won't help people by ENCOURAGING them to improve!
All you want to do is MAKE them more dependent! How cruel people like you are and even more how disingenuous!
Sounding all caring and compassionate for the Little people!
Disgusting.
So when YOU can cut this cliched, tired old crap about "helping the little people" and actual help people by teaching them how to fish and not just giving them a fish... maybe you can join the grown ups conversations!

Well,I was just taking a WAG at how you came up with your bogus numbers. I think I know what it is now. You're looking at GDP where GDP per capita is the pertinent metric. Strange that such a key cog in the steno pool should make such a sloppy mistake.

BTW, your Angie's List pipe dream sounds a whole lot like a ghetto kid looking to make it big as a rapper. Oh well, what else do you have to do besides spend 12 hours a day on this pathetic site.

You're looking at GDP where GDP per capita is the pertinent metric

GDP in 2009 dollars Population GDP per capita in 2009 dollars.

He clearly has GDP per capita. Sloppy?

Wealth is a Zero-Sum Game

Conservative damagogues like Limbaugh have been able to convince the public that the huge incomes of the wealthiest Americans are irrelevant to those who make moderate-to-low incomes. They even suggest that the more money the wealthiest Americans make, the more wealth will trickle down to the lower classes.

If you've swallowed this line of conservative garbage, get ready to vomit. As all conservative economists know, and deny to the public that they know, wealth is a zero-sum game. That is true at both the front end—when income is divided up, and the back end—when it is spent.

The Front End of Zero-Sum: Dividing the Loot

There is only so much corporate income in a given year. The more of that income that is used to pay workers, the less profit the corporation makes. The less profit, the less the stock goes up. The less the stock goes up, the less the CEO and the investors make. It’s as simple as that. Profit equals income minus expenses. No more, no less. Subtract the right side of the equation from the left side and the answer is always zero. Hence the term, “zero-sum.”

So, to the extent a corporation can keep from sharing the wealth with workers—the ones who created the wealth to begin with—investors and executives get a bigger slice of the income pie and become richer.

To understand this aspect of the zero-sum nature of wealth, and the way many people get rich—that is, besides selling-out our workers to Third World countries—consider how Gates, Eisner, and Welch Jr. did it. It’s no mystery, and it isn’t all that hard to do.

Although the following specific details are fictional, the scenario is accurate. Through their emissaries, Mr. Bill Gates (CEO of Micro- soft), met with Michael Eisner (CEO of Walt Disney Corp.), and John Welch Jr. (CEO of General Electric). Their discussion went like this:

Gates: “Gentlemen, you astute, wise, talented, outstanding, and morally principled managers of today—I can sell you something that cost me $10 per unit to produce for $400 each. It’s a little disk with a bunch of zeros and ones on it.”

Eisner and Welch Jr., in unison: “Why in the hell would we be stupid enough to do something like that?”

Gates: “Simple. It will enable your secretaries to produce twice as much work in half the time. In other words, you can fire half your secretaries—those who helped make your organizations successful in the first place. And the secretaries who remain will still work the same hours for the same pay. You will cut your labor costs in half, the stock of your companies will skyrocket and your grateful shareholders will reward your managerial brilliance by making you incredibly, fabulously rich. Not like me, of course, but pretty damn rich.

“Here’s another wrinkle you’ll love. When your companies start growing again, Disney will hire the experienced secretaries that GE fired, and GE will hire the secretaries that Disney fired. Since they are new employees, they’ll start out at base pay, which has hardly budged for the past 20 years—and with no benefits. Times are tough for secretaries these days, you know, with the corporate downsizing and all.

“Oh yes, with Republicans in control of Congress and Clinton ap-pointing conservative judges to the courts, you can work your secretaries’ asses off, and you don’t have to worry about them getting carpal tunnel syndrome and suing you.”

If you think that this scenario is far-fetched, read what Barron’s had to say about “What’s Behind America’s Trend Towards Widened Income Inequality?”:

The revolution in office technology has broken the back of the market for secretaries and clerks. Robotics has destroyed whole categories of factory work. These seismic shifts have meant that millions of people who might otherwise have gotten the blue- and pink-collar positions in these sectors must now chase what jobs remain. And an in-creased labor supply generally brings a lower wage. (Oct. 26, 1998, 55)

Two simple questions: Who got most of the benefits of all this new technology? Who made all the sacrifices? It was no accident

The Zero-sum Nature of economics

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Well,I was just taking a WAG at how you came up with your bogus numbers. I think I know what it is now. You're looking at GDP where GDP per capita is the pertinent metric. Strange that such a key cog in the steno pool should make such a sloppy mistake.

BTW, your Angie's List pipe dream sounds a whole lot like a ghetto kid looking to make it big as a rapper. Oh well, what else do you have to do besides spend 12 hours a day on this pathetic site.

You're looking at GDP where GDP per capita is the pertinent metric

GDP in 2009 dollars Population GDP per capita in 2009 dollars.

He clearly has GDP per capita. Sloppy?

Wealth is a Zero-Sum Game

Conservative damagogues like Limbaugh have been able to convince the public that the huge incomes of the wealthiest Americans are irrelevant to those who make moderate-to-low incomes. They even suggest that the more money the wealthiest Americans make, the more wealth will trickle down to the lower classes.

If you've swallowed this line of conservative garbage, get ready to vomit. As all conservative economists know, and deny to the public that they know, wealth is a zero-sum game. That is true at both the front end—when income is divided up, and the back end—when it is spent.

The Front End of Zero-Sum: Dividing the Loot

There is only so much corporate income in a given year. The more of that income that is used to pay workers, the less profit the corporation makes. The less profit, the less the stock goes up. The less the stock goes up, the less the CEO and the investors make. It’s as simple as that. Profit equals income minus expenses. No more, no less. Subtract the right side of the equation from the left side and the answer is always zero. Hence the term, “zero-sum.”

So, to the extent a corporation can keep from sharing the wealth with workers—the ones who created the wealth to begin with—investors and executives get a bigger slice of the income pie and become richer.

To understand this aspect of the zero-sum nature of wealth, and the way many people get rich—that is, besides selling-out our workers to Third World countries—consider how Gates, Eisner, and Welch Jr. did it. It’s no mystery, and it isn’t all that hard to do.

Although the following specific details are fictional, the scenario is accurate. Through their emissaries, Mr. Bill Gates (CEO of Micro- soft), met with Michael Eisner (CEO of Walt Disney Corp.), and John Welch Jr. (CEO of General Electric). Their discussion went like this:

Gates: “Gentlemen, you astute, wise, talented, outstanding, and morally principled managers of today—I can sell you something that cost me $10 per unit to produce for $400 each. It’s a little disk with a bunch of zeros and ones on it.”

Eisner and Welch Jr., in unison: “Why in the hell would we be stupid enough to do something like that?”

Gates: “Simple. It will enable your secretaries to produce twice as much work in half the time. In other words, you can fire half your secretaries—those who helped make your organizations successful in the first place. And the secretaries who remain will still work the same hours for the same pay. You will cut your labor costs in half, the stock of your companies will skyrocket and your grateful shareholders will reward your managerial brilliance by making you incredibly, fabulously rich. Not like me, of course, but pretty damn rich.

“Here’s another wrinkle you’ll love. When your companies start growing again, Disney will hire the experienced secretaries that GE fired, and GE will hire the secretaries that Disney fired. Since they are new employees, they’ll start out at base pay, which has hardly budged for the past 20 years—and with no benefits. Times are tough for secretaries these days, you know, with the corporate downsizing and all.

“Oh yes, with Republicans in control of Congress and Clinton ap-pointing conservative judges to the courts, you can work your secretaries’ asses off, and you don’t have to worry about them getting carpal tunnel syndrome and suing you.”

If you think that this scenario is far-fetched, read what Barron’s had to say about “What’s Behind America’s Trend Towards Widened Income Inequality?”:

The revolution in office technology has broken the back of the market for secretaries and clerks. Robotics has destroyed whole categories of factory work. These seismic shifts have meant that millions of people who might otherwise have gotten the blue- and pink-collar positions in these sectors must now chase what jobs remain. And an in-creased labor supply generally brings a lower wage. (Oct. 26, 1998, 55)

Two simple questions: Who got most of the benefits of all this new technology? Who made all the sacrifices? It was no accident

The Zero-sum Nature of economics

Wealth is a Zero-Sum Game

Who lost wealth when Zuckerberg created Facebook?

When Page and Brin created Google?

When Walt Disney drew Mickey Mouse?

 

[Dad2three]

You're looking at GDP where GDP per capita is the pertinent metric

GDP in 2009 dollars Population GDP per capita in 2009 dollars.

He clearly has GDP per capita. Sloppy?

Wealth is a Zero-Sum Game

Conservative damagogues like Limbaugh have been able to convince the public that the huge incomes of the wealthiest Americans are irrelevant to those who make moderate-to-low incomes. They even suggest that the more money the wealthiest Americans make, the more wealth will trickle down to the lower classes.

If you've swallowed this line of conservative garbage, get ready to vomit. As all conservative economists know, and deny to the public that they know, wealth is a zero-sum game. That is true at both the front end—when income is divided up, and the back end—when it is spent.

The Front End of Zero-Sum: Dividing the Loot

There is only so much corporate income in a given year. The more of that income that is used to pay workers, the less profit the corporation makes. The less profit, the less the stock goes up. The less the stock goes up, the less the CEO and the investors make. It’s as simple as that. Profit equals income minus expenses. No more, no less. Subtract the right side of the equation from the left side and the answer is always zero. Hence the term, “zero-sum.”

So, to the extent a corporation can keep from sharing the wealth with workers—the ones who created the wealth to begin with—investors and executives get a bigger slice of the income pie and become richer.

To understand this aspect of the zero-sum nature of wealth, and the way many people get rich—that is, besides selling-out our workers to Third World countries—consider how Gates, Eisner, and Welch Jr. did it. It’s no mystery, and it isn’t all that hard to do.

Although the following specific details are fictional, the scenario is accurate. Through their emissaries, Mr. Bill Gates (CEO of Micro- soft), met with Michael Eisner (CEO of Walt Disney Corp.), and John Welch Jr. (CEO of General Electric). Their discussion went like this:

Gates: “Gentlemen, you astute, wise, talented, outstanding, and morally principled managers of today—I can sell you something that cost me $10 per unit to produce for $400 each. It’s a little disk with a bunch of zeros and ones on it.”

Eisner and Welch Jr., in unison: “Why in the hell would we be stupid enough to do something like that?”

Gates: “Simple. It will enable your secretaries to produce twice as much work in half the time. In other words, you can fire half your secretaries—those who helped make your organizations successful in the first place. And the secretaries who remain will still work the same hours for the same pay. You will cut your labor costs in half, the stock of your companies will skyrocket and your grateful shareholders will reward your managerial brilliance by making you incredibly, fabulously rich. Not like me, of course, but pretty damn rich.

“Here’s another wrinkle you’ll love. When your companies start growing again, Disney will hire the experienced secretaries that GE fired, and GE will hire the secretaries that Disney fired. Since they are new employees, they’ll start out at base pay, which has hardly budged for the past 20 years—and with no benefits. Times are tough for secretaries these days, you know, with the corporate downsizing and all.

“Oh yes, with Republicans in control of Congress and Clinton ap-pointing conservative judges to the courts, you can work your secretaries’ asses off, and you don’t have to worry about them getting carpal tunnel syndrome and suing you.”

If you think that this scenario is far-fetched, read what Barron’s had to say about “What’s Behind America’s Trend Towards Widened Income Inequality?”:

The revolution in office technology has broken the back of the market for secretaries and clerks. Robotics has destroyed whole categories of factory work. These seismic shifts have meant that millions of people who might otherwise have gotten the blue- and pink-collar positions in these sectors must now chase what jobs remain. And an in-creased labor supply generally brings a lower wage. (Oct. 26, 1998, 55)

Two simple questions: Who got most of the benefits of all this new technology? Who made all the sacrifices? It was no accident

The Zero-sum Nature of economics

Wealth is a Zero-Sum Game

Who lost wealth when Zuckerberg created Facebook?

When Page and Brin created Google?

When Walt Disney drew Mickey Mouse?

To much for YOU to read huh?



" There is only so much corporate income in a given year. The more of that income that is used to pay workers, the less profit the corporation makes. The less profit, the less the stock goes up. The less the stock goes up, the less the CEO and the investors make. It’s as simple as that. "


The Zero-sum Nature of economics



If I 'make' a million dollars, I accumulated money from other people. I'm not actually producing cash, I'm acquiring theirs. Therefore, others have collectively lost a million dollars of purchasing power to me.

These people can't go demand new money just because I have all of their money.

They go broke, I get rich, and income inequality is a thing.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Wealth is a Zero-Sum Game

Conservative damagogues like Limbaugh have been able to convince the public that the huge incomes of the wealthiest Americans are irrelevant to those who make moderate-to-low incomes. They even suggest that the more money the wealthiest Americans make, the more wealth will trickle down to the lower classes.

If you've swallowed this line of conservative garbage, get ready to vomit. As all conservative economists know, and deny to the public that they know, wealth is a zero-sum game. That is true at both the front end—when income is divided up, and the back end—when it is spent.

The Front End of Zero-Sum: Dividing the Loot

There is only so much corporate income in a given year. The more of that income that is used to pay workers, the less profit the corporation makes. The less profit, the less the stock goes up. The less the stock goes up, the less the CEO and the investors make. It’s as simple as that. Profit equals income minus expenses. No more, no less. Subtract the right side of the equation from the left side and the answer is always zero. Hence the term, “zero-sum.”

So, to the extent a corporation can keep from sharing the wealth with workers—the ones who created the wealth to begin with—investors and executives get a bigger slice of the income pie and become richer.

To understand this aspect of the zero-sum nature of wealth, and the way many people get rich—that is, besides selling-out our workers to Third World countries—consider how Gates, Eisner, and Welch Jr. did it. It’s no mystery, and it isn’t all that hard to do.

Although the following specific details are fictional, the scenario is accurate. Through their emissaries, Mr. Bill Gates (CEO of Micro- soft), met with Michael Eisner (CEO of Walt Disney Corp.), and John Welch Jr. (CEO of General Electric). Their discussion went like this:

Gates: “Gentlemen, you astute, wise, talented, outstanding, and morally principled managers of today—I can sell you something that cost me $10 per unit to produce for $400 each. It’s a little disk with a bunch of zeros and ones on it.”

Eisner and Welch Jr., in unison: “Why in the hell would we be stupid enough to do something like that?”

Gates: “Simple. It will enable your secretaries to produce twice as much work in half the time. In other words, you can fire half your secretaries—those who helped make your organizations successful in the first place. And the secretaries who remain will still work the same hours for the same pay. You will cut your labor costs in half, the stock of your companies will skyrocket and your grateful shareholders will reward your managerial brilliance by making you incredibly, fabulously rich. Not like me, of course, but pretty damn rich.

“Here’s another wrinkle you’ll love. When your companies start growing again, Disney will hire the experienced secretaries that GE fired, and GE will hire the secretaries that Disney fired. Since they are new employees, they’ll start out at base pay, which has hardly budged for the past 20 years—and with no benefits. Times are tough for secretaries these days, you know, with the corporate downsizing and all.

“Oh yes, with Republicans in control of Congress and Clinton ap-pointing conservative judges to the courts, you can work your secretaries’ asses off, and you don’t have to worry about them getting carpal tunnel syndrome and suing you.”

If you think that this scenario is far-fetched, read what Barron’s had to say about “What’s Behind America’s Trend Towards Widened Income Inequality?”:

The revolution in office technology has broken the back of the market for secretaries and clerks. Robotics has destroyed whole categories of factory work. These seismic shifts have meant that millions of people who might otherwise have gotten the blue- and pink-collar positions in these sectors must now chase what jobs remain. And an in-creased labor supply generally brings a lower wage. (Oct. 26, 1998, 55)

Two simple questions: Who got most of the benefits of all this new technology? Who made all the sacrifices? It was no accident

The Zero-sum Nature of economics

Wealth is a Zero-Sum Game

Who lost wealth when Zuckerberg created Facebook?

When Page and Brin created Google?

When Walt Disney drew Mickey Mouse?

To much for YOU to read huh?



" There is only so much corporate income in a given year. The more of that income that is used to pay workers, the less profit the corporation makes. The less profit, the less the stock goes up. The less the stock goes up, the less the CEO and the investors make. It’s as simple as that. "


The Zero-sum Nature of economics



If I 'make' a million dollars, I accumulated money from other people. I'm not actually producing cash, I'm acquiring theirs. Therefore, others have collectively lost a million dollars of purchasing power to me.

These people can't go demand new money just because I have all of their money.

They go broke, I get rich, and income inequality is a thing.

If I 'make' a million dollars, I accumulated money from other people.

If they freely purchased your product, they believe it was worth more to them than the cash they traded.

Therefore, others have collectively lost a million dollars of purchasing power to me.

They didn't lose it, they freely used it to buy what you were selling.

These people can't go demand new money just because I have all of their money.

They could have kept their money, they valued your goods instead.

They go broke, I get rich, and income inequality is a thing.

Freedom is awful, I should make a law so they can't buy stuff from you.

 

[Dad2three]

Wealth is a Zero-Sum Game

Who lost wealth when Zuckerberg created Facebook?

When Page and Brin created Google?

When Walt Disney drew Mickey Mouse?

To much for YOU to read huh?



" There is only so much corporate income in a given year. The more of that income that is used to pay workers, the less profit the corporation makes. The less profit, the less the stock goes up. The less the stock goes up, the less the CEO and the investors make. It’s as simple as that. "


The Zero-sum Nature of economics



If I 'make' a million dollars, I accumulated money from other people. I'm not actually producing cash, I'm acquiring theirs. Therefore, others have collectively lost a million dollars of purchasing power to me.

These people can't go demand new money just because I have all of their money.

They go broke, I get rich, and income inequality is a thing.

If I 'make' a million dollars, I accumulated money from other people.

If they freely purchased your product, they believe it was worth more to them than the cash they traded.

Therefore, others have collectively lost a million dollars of purchasing power to me.

They didn't lose it, they freely used it to buy what you were selling.

These people can't go demand new money just because I have all of their money.

They could have kept their money, they valued your goods instead.

They go broke, I get rich, and income inequality is a thing.

Freedom is awful, I should make a law so they can't buy stuff from you.

Conservatives and their bumper sticker mentality strike again *shaking head*

GLAD YOU AGREE

Wealth is a Zero-Sum Game

 

[JoeNormal]

Again your reading comprehension IS really poor!
I'll repeat the numbers NOTE THEY ARE IN 2009 dollars! Meaning for you the figures ARE adjusted for INFLATION!

Using these FACTS...

• GDP in 2009 dollars Population GDP per capita in 2009 dollars.
• 1800 $ 7,994,000,000 5,297,000 $ 1,509
• 1900 $ 456,861,000,000 76,094,000 $ 6,003
• 2013 $15,759,000,000,000 316,465,000 $49,797

Measuring Worth - GDP result.

That is your retort? "Run along now..."
Once again you are showing the gross ignorance of people like you that make totally unsubstantiated,hyperbolic statements.
Why is an adult dialogue impossible for someone who bragged they were part "Being one of the people who has created some of those productivity gains (including the miniaturized wonders that you think compensates for this disparity), I think that's a crime. I guess as a memeber of the upper middle class,".
How pompous! But that's how people like you think!
You want to take care of the little poor people. Run their lives..."even though you can't even spell "member"!
You type of elitists are so happy to show how compassionate you are YET you won't help people by ENCOURAGING them to improve!
All you want to do is MAKE them more dependent! How cruel people like you are and even more how disingenuous!
Sounding all caring and compassionate for the Little people!
Disgusting.
So when YOU can cut this cliched, tired old crap about "helping the little people" and actual help people by teaching them how to fish and not just giving them a fish... maybe you can join the grown ups conversations!

Well,I was just taking a WAG at how you came up with your bogus numbers. I think I know what it is now. You're looking at GDP where GDP per capita is the pertinent metric. Strange that such a key cog in the steno pool should make such a sloppy mistake.

BTW, your Angie's List pipe dream sounds a whole lot like a ghetto kid looking to make it big as a rapper. Oh well, what else do you have to do besides spend 12 hours a day on this pathetic site.

You're looking at GDP where GDP per capita is the pertinent metric

GDP in 2009 dollars Population GDP per capita in 2009 dollars.

He clearly has GDP per capita. Sloppy?

His criticism of my 'sloppiness' was because i said that in the 40 years i've been in the workforce, GDP per capita had doubled. Refer to the graph i posted and you'll see it's true. But if you want to go with the 3x metric, it only reinforces my point all the more.