Lets talk about income inequality

[Vox]

total LIE.

as usually with leftards.

No, actually it isn't. That you refuse to see the facts is a little disturbing though.

From motherfuckingjones?

Gimme a fucking break. They're a communist website fer shits sake

it does not even matter if the graph is even correct.

It does NOT support her claim - that WEALTH is accumulated 98% in 10% of population.

It is a total LIE.

but our leftards do not understand the difference.

they also do not understand that their fear mongering about increasing tensions between the poor and 1% are leading to the inevitability of revolution.

It's a LIE as well - the poor are actually not getting poorer, but much richer.
and their amount is NOT increasing.

The wealth distribution has been about the same since 1922, with some increases and decreases, but not in the recent 40 years.

 

[Edgetho]

total LIE.

as usually with leftards.

No, actually it isn't. That you refuse to see the facts is a little disturbing though.

sweetheart, if you talk about WEALTH, do not post graphs about INCOME.

is it too much to ask?

a hint - those are two related but not identical things.

wealth distribution has not changed much during the last 40 years and is about the same as in 1922
wealth distribution GAP increases during dimocrap administrations and decreases during republican.
In fact the smallest it has been in 1972-1979 - during Nixon and Ford

Yeah, and how come one is pre-tax and the other after-tax? what's up with that?

And what is Income?

Is Welfare 'Income'?

Is the SNAP program Income?

How about subsidized housing or Earned Income Credit? Are they Income?

Are Pensions considered 'Income'? How about Social Security?

Is the massive increase in the number of people on disability.... Is their check considered Income?

And what about Net Worth?

Can our libturd pals please define what is 'Net Worth'?

I can. And I can tell you that it DOES NOT include a person's Primary Residence.

Which is where most Americans' wealth is.

If you own a $250,000 House outright and have $20k in the Bank but a Pension that gives you $5k a Month plus Social Security of $1,500 a Month.....

I'd say you're doing okay, wouldn't you?

But in the eyes of the douchebags that make those graphs -- You're poor as shit. You fall below the poverty line because Pension disbursements and SS are NOT Income

dimocraps lie. It's what they do. It's all they do.

It's why you can't have a discussion with them. Everything they say is based on lies.

everything

 

[bendog]

I have been told it causes crime, gun violence, and is unfair. I say that it isn't a problem and that life ain't fair.

Anyone want to tell me why I am wrong?

Well, there's income inequality and then there's wealth disparity. When the top 10% of the nation owns more wealth than the bottom 90% combined, there is something wrong. No country can long stand with such a disparity of wealth.

except you are wrong.


WEALTH inequality in the US.

it has not changed much since 1922:
Table 4: Share of wealth held by the Bottom 99% and Top 1% in the United States, 1922-2010.
Year Bottom 99% Top 1%


True, but there's a growing inequality between the top 20%, or so, and others. That is less skilled jobs are paying less, and a wealth gap is happening there.

Who Rules America: Wealth, Income, and Power

This isn't a call for redistribution but more a comment upon what's happening. If anything it might be an argument for publically funded healthcare to replace benefits unions once "bargained" for.

 

[Brain357]

total LIE.

as usually with leftards.

No, actually it isn't. That you refuse to see the facts is a little disturbing though.

sweetheart, if you talk about WEALTH, do not post graphs about INCOME.

is it too much to ask?

a hint - those are two related but not identical things.

wealth distribution has not changed much during the last 40 years and is about the same as in 1922
wealth distribution GAP increases during dimocrap administrations and decreases during republican.
In fact the smallest it has been in 1972-1979 - during Nixon and Ford

If it hasn't changed much how are things going for the bottom 80 percent? Since 1983 they have gone from 18.7 to 11.1 percent. That's a big change.

 

[Vox]

No, actually it isn't. That you refuse to see the facts is a little disturbing though.

sweetheart, if you talk about WEALTH, do not post graphs about INCOME.

is it too much to ask?

a hint - those are two related but not identical things.

wealth distribution has not changed much during the last 40 years and is about the same as in 1922
wealth distribution GAP increases during dimocrap administrations and decreases during republican.
In fact the smallest it has been in 1972-1979 - during Nixon and Ford

Yeah, and how come one is pre-tax and the other after-tax? what's up with that?

And what is Income?

Is Welfare 'Income'?

Is the SNAP program Income?

How about subsidized housing or Earned Income Credit? Are they Income?

Are Pensions considered 'Income'? How about Social Security?

Is the massive increase in the number of people on disability.... Is their check considered Income?

And what about Net Worth?

Can our libturd pals please define what is 'Net Worth'?

I can. And I can tell you that it DOES NOT include a person's Primary Residence.

Which is where most Americans' wealth is.

If you own a $250,000 House outright and have $20k in the Bank but a Pension that gives you $5k a Month plus Social Security of $1,500 a Month.....

I'd say you're doing okay, wouldn't you?

But in the eyes of the douchebags that make those graphs -- You're poor as shit. You fall below the poverty line because Pension disbursements and SS are NOT Income

dimocraps lie. It's what they do. It's all they do.

It's why you can't have a discussion with them. Everything they say is based on lies.

everything

totally agree

 

[Bern80]

I don't think anyone denies there is major income gap in america. The real question is who's responsibility is it (if any) to do something about it?

 

[KissMy]

Have you ever considered that most people are poor because they're stupid and/or lazy?

You should think about that

You ever think people are poor because they have morals. They refuse to place all their good wealth producing assets in their "good corporation" & cram all the toxic shit into a "good corporation" owned by others & make government pay for the cleanup while pointing at the stupid poor.

Only the mind of the thief thinks that all wealthy people got their money dishonestly.

In fact, I'm gonna tell you like it is.... The poor are FAR more likely to be dishonest dirtbags than any other group of people on Earth.

Go into wealthy neighborhoods and see how many bars are on the windows.

Then go into poor neighborhoods.

The vast majority of 'wealthy' people made their money through hard work. Many of them by being small business owners and I'll tell you something right now....

You want to go out of business QUICK?

Approach it with an attitude like you have.

The reason you're poor is simple....

You're stupid. You make stupid assumptions about things you clearly have no idea about

The billionaires don't need to crawl through bars on windows to rob stupid people like you. They have the government do it for them. I did not make assumptions about the elite not paying the percent of taxes I have, I looked into it & many of them don't.

I am not poor or out of business. I have over a thousand acres, many houses & lots of gold & cash.

Stupid people like you don't comprehend complex schemes they use to defraud you, so you make stupid assumptions that most 'wealthy billionaires' made their money through their hard work & not a lowlife scheme that defrauded money from the hard work of others.

A prosecutor knows they can easily win a thousand cases against poor people who may not be guilty but can't put up a defense [or] they could spend all year to maybe win against one rich criminal who defrauded ten thousands of people, they choose the thousand wins & a campaign donation from the rich to show how awesome of a prosecutor they are in order to get re-elected. This is precisely why stupid people like you believe the rich are not crooks.

 

[KissMy]

I don't think anyone denies there is major income gap in america. The real question is who's responsibility is it (if any) to do something about it?

Who gets paid to police & prosecute fraud?

 

[Vox]

Well, there's income inequality and then there's wealth disparity. When the top 10% of the nation owns more wealth than the bottom 90% combined, there is something wrong. No country can long stand with such a disparity of wealth.

except you are wrong.


WEALTH inequality in the US.

it has not changed much since 1922:
Table 4: Share of wealth held by the Bottom 99% and Top 1% in the United States, 1922-2010.
Year Bottom 99% Top 1%

True, but there's a growing inequality between the top 20%, or so, and others. That is less skilled jobs are paying less, and a wealth gap is happening there.

Who Rules America: Wealth, Income, and Power

This isn't a call for redistribution but more a comment upon what's happening. If anything it might be an argument for publically funded healthcare to replace benefits unions once "bargained" for.

as I have said above - the stalled INCOME growth is due to the strangulation of the private sector by government regulation, taxation and overreach - THAT is the reason the INCOME growth has been so poor for American household ( there is a graph about it as well).

 

[Vox]

No, actually it isn't. That you refuse to see the facts is a little disturbing though.

sweetheart, if you talk about WEALTH, do not post graphs about INCOME.

is it too much to ask?

a hint - those are two related but not identical things.

wealth distribution has not changed much during the last 40 years and is about the same as in 1922
wealth distribution GAP increases during dimocrap administrations and decreases during republican.
In fact the smallest it has been in 1972-1979 - during Nixon and Ford

If it hasn't changed much how are things going for the bottom 80 percent? Since 1983 they have gone from 18.7 to 11.1 percent. That's a big change.

still does not change the figure that the hated 1% did not accumulate more wealth.

what it shows, though, that middle class EXPANDED - the next 19% increased wealth from 47.5% to 53.5% - and that is a very good thing.
because those upper 20% ( which millionaires and billionaires are only 1% and the rest are solid middle class) PAY ALL FEDERAL TAXES.
All of them. The bottom 80% do not pay ANY FEDERAL INCOME TAXES.

so the upper 20% who pay ALL THE FEDERAL INCOME TAXES pay much more than their "fair share"

 

[zeke]

sweetheart, if you talk about WEALTH, do not post graphs about INCOME.

is it too much to ask?

a hint - those are two related but not identical things.

wealth distribution has not changed much during the last 40 years and is about the same as in 1922
wealth distribution GAP increases during dimocrap administrations and decreases during republican.
In fact the smallest it has been in 1972-1979 - during Nixon and Ford

If it hasn't changed much how are things going for the bottom 80 percent? Since 1983 they have gone from 18.7 to 11.1 percent. That's a big change.

still does not change the figure that the hated 1% did not accumulate more wealth.

what it shows, though, that middle class EXPANDED - the next 19% increased wealth from 47.5% to 53.5% - and that is a very good thing.
because those upper 20% ( which millionaires and billionaires are only 1% and the rest are solid middle class) PAY ALL FEDERAL TAXES.
All of them. The bottom 80% do not pay ANY FEDERAL INCOME TAXES.

so the upper 20% who pay ALL THE FEDERAL INCOME TAXES pay much more than their "fair share"

So now you think that 89% of the people pay no income tax. Even Mittens thought is was only 50% of so.

Does it hurt to be so stupid? I mean like really painful.

 

[Vox]

If it hasn't changed much how are things going for the bottom 80 percent? Since 1983 they have gone from 18.7 to 11.1 percent. That's a big change.

still does not change the figure that the hated 1% did not accumulate more wealth.

what it shows, though, that middle class EXPANDED - the next 19% increased wealth from 47.5% to 53.5% - and that is a very good thing.
because those upper 20% ( which millionaires and billionaires are only 1% and the rest are solid middle class) PAY ALL FEDERAL TAXES.
All of them. The bottom 80% do not pay ANY FEDERAL INCOME TAXES.

so the upper 20% who pay ALL THE FEDERAL INCOME TAXES pay much more than their "fair share"

So now you think that 89% of the people pay no income tax. Even Mittens thought is was only 50% of so.

Does it hurt to be so stupid? I mean like really painful.

are you so damn stooooopid, or just simple LIAR?

where do I talk about 89%?

 

[Redfish]

I don't think anyone denies there is major income gap in america. The real question is who's responsibility is it (if any) to do something about it?

Who gets paid to police & prosecute fraud?

so in your small mind all rich people got that way by fraud??? Really?

I think the people you really hate are the "old money" people, the ones that inherited it, like the Kennedy's, and are living off the interest and dividends of their stock holdings.

your problem is jealousy. Grow up.

 

[Toro]

I have been told it causes crime, gun violence, and is unfair. I say that it isn't a problem and that life ain't fair.

Anyone want to tell me why I am wrong?

Income Inequality is Bad for Society. Really Bad. » Sociological Images

 

[Vox]

population in figures
top 1% - everybody who earns 343,927+ - those are NOT even millionaries, just upper middle class.

1%-5% 154,643 - 343,927 - those are not even UPPER MIDDLE class, just solid middle class

5%-10% 112,124 - 154,643 - those are your proverbial teachers, policemen and firefighters. and the whole host of others - are those RICH?

10%-25% 66,193- 112,124 - those are also RICH?


The top 10 percent of income earners paid 71 percent of all federal income taxes in 2009

Top 10 Percent of Earners Paid Majority of US Tax Percentage

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I have been told it causes crime, gun violence, and is unfair. I say that it isn't a problem and that life ain't fair.

Anyone want to tell me why I am wrong?

The French aristocracy didn't think it was a problem either...

Neither did the people that got rich off the revolution, what's your point?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I have been told it causes crime, gun violence, and is unfair. I say that it isn't a problem and that life ain't fair.

Anyone want to tell me why I am wrong?

Well, there's income inequality and then there's wealth disparity. When the top 10% of the nation owns more wealth than the bottom 90% combined, there is something wrong. No country can long stand with such a disparity of wealth.

Since 1980 98% of all the nations wealth has gone to that same top 10% of earners. Those that don't see this as a problem are fooling themselves.

That is not even close to being true.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Since 1980 98% of all the nations wealth has gone to that same top 10% of earners. Those that don't see this as a problem are fooling themselves.

total LIE.

as usually with leftards.

No, actually it isn't. That you refuse to see the facts is a little disturbing though.

First, those charts have nothing to do with what you said.

Second, the top 20% includes a huge portion of the middle class.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

No, actually it isn't. That you refuse to see the facts is a little disturbing though.

sweetheart, if you talk about WEALTH, do not post graphs about INCOME.

is it too much to ask?

a hint - those are two related but not identical things.

wealth distribution has not changed much during the last 40 years and is about the same as in 1922
wealth distribution GAP increases during dimocrap administrations and decreases during republican.
In fact the smallest it has been in 1972-1979 - during Nixon and Ford

If it hasn't changed much how are things going for the bottom 80 percent? Since 1983 they have gone from 18.7 to 11.1 percent. That's a big change.

There are fewer poor people, and that proves things are bad?

 

[Edgetho]

population in figures
top 1% - everybody who earns 343,927+ - those are NOT even millionaries, just upper middle class.

1%-5% 154,643 - 343,927 - those are not even UPPER MIDDLE class, just solid middle class

5%-10% 112,124 - 154,643 - those are your proverbial teachers, policemen and firefighters. and the whole host of others - are those RICH?

10%-25% 66,193- 112,124 - those are also RICH?


The top 10 percent of income earners paid 71 percent of all federal income taxes in 2009

Top 10 Percent of Earners Paid Majority of US Tax Percentage

Then I'd say that the other 90% aren't paying their fair share.

Why not? They take up the same amount of space on the roads. An Ambulance doesn't charge any less to take them to the Hospital than it does a Rich Person.

They usually, actually -- ALWAYS, require more Police and Fire Department support than do rich people.

Their kids are usually about as stupid as they are (very) and so crowd our already over-burdened Schools with even more stupidity while the Rich tend to send their kids to Private Schools.

I'd say the Bottom 90% aren't pulling their weight and need to get a 2nd job.

And maybe a 3rd.

Actually, it would be a good start for them to show up at their primary job.