On the GOP

[CrusaderFrank]

Conservative believe America is the Land of Opportunity; Progressives believe America is the land of Opportunity to collect Free Stuff

Then they are both wrong, then.

Conservatives believe because they are a little higher on the dungheap than "those people', they are somehow better off when most of them aren't.

Reality check, we were all more prosperous under Clinton than we were under Bush.

Maybe you should tell Bill Clinton you want to get back under him

 

[Oddball]

Then they are both wrong, then.

Conservatives believe because they are a little higher on the dungheap than "those people', they are somehow better off when most of them aren't.

Reality check, we were all more prosperous under Clinton than we were under Bush.

lots of things happened in Clintons reign that helped like the Dot com boom.....Bush started off with 9/11, that would not have helped anyone......but being that he was such a piss poor leader he went from a 90% approval rating to the lower end of the spectrum in no time....

I actually vote for Bush both times. In 2000 because I was tired of Clinton's scandals and in 2004 because Kerry struck me as such a surrender monkey.

Some things that happened in his regime were beyond his control, like 9/11. Other things weren't, like going to war in IRaq or the poor response to Katrina.

Incidently, I think that Bush's first term wasn't that bad, because he had the grownups in the room with him- Ex Senators and Governors who knew how to get things done. It was the second term when he replaced them with cronies he had problems.

WTF are you blabbering about?....He had neocon cronies from wall to wall in his entire administration from day one.

 

[Harry Dresden]

Conservative believe America is the Land of Opportunity; Progressives believe America is the land of Opportunity to collect Free Stuff

Then they are both wrong, then.

Conservatives believe because they are a little higher on the dungheap than "those people', they are somehow better off when most of them aren't.

Reality check, we were all more prosperous under Clinton than we were under Bush.

Maybe you should tell Bill Clinton you want to get back under him

i would rather have Billy than the in over his head guy we have now....

 

[Antares]

Then they are both wrong, then.

Conservatives believe because they are a little higher on the dungheap than "those people', they are somehow better off when most of them aren't.

Reality check, we were all more prosperous under Clinton than we were under Bush.

Maybe you should tell Bill Clinton you want to get back under him

i would rather have Billy than the in over his head guy we have now....

As would I.

 

[Trajan]

[

No, you're a Marxist because you think capitalism is treason and evil, investing is parasitic, offshoring is treason and CEOs who do it should be hung, the 1% is the enemy, all wealth is stolen, and there should be an equal division of wealth.

Did I forget anything?

If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck ...

"and he's bigoted against Mormons, too.... waaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhh".

Because, hey, if you are going to whine about everything that offended your precious little sensibilities over the last two years, you can't leave that out.



How is offshoring NOT treason?

How is the 1% not the enemy? They certainly aren't my friends, therefore they must be the enemy.

Incidently,I think there should a FAIR distribution of wealth. So do most Americans. What saves you guys is people don't realize how skewed the numbers are.

good point. This is from my Krugman thread:

His 2 1/2 min closing argument here:

Paul Krugman - C-SPAN Video Library

what the wealth distribution is
what people think it is
what people would like it to be

this is an upwardly mobile society, the numbers have barely moved since they started collecting them, its a red herring.


example-

Table 4: Share of wealth held by the Bottom 99% and Top 1% in the United States, 1922-2010.

Bottom 99 percent- second column, Top 1 percent

1922 63.3% 36.7%
1929 55.8% 44.2%
1933 66.7% 33.3%
1939 63.6% 36.4%
1945 70.2% 29.8%
1949 72.9% 27.1%
1953 68.8% 31.2%
1962 68.2% 31.8%
1965 65.6% 34.4%
1969 68.9% 31.1%
1972 70.9% 29.1%
1976 80.1% 19.9%
1979 79.5% 20.5%
1981 75.2% 24.8%
1983 69.1% 30.9%
1986 68.1% 31.9%
1989 64.3% 35.7%
1992 62.8% 37.2%
1995 61.5% 38.5%
1998 61.9% 38.1%
2001 66.6% 33.4%
2004 65.7% 34.3%
2007 65.4% 34.6%
2010 64.6% 35.4%

Who Rules America: Wealth, Income, and Power

 

[Vandalshandle]

Well, you can't argue with the figures. The top 1% have held too much of the wealth for at least 90 years.....

 

[Trajan]

Well, you can't argue with the figures. The top 1% have held too much of the wealth for at least 90 years.....

well thats what Domhoff (who is a research professor of sociology ) at Santa Cruz Univ Calif. argues...you cannot argue the numbers ( I have tried, but hes pretty solid) ).

I posted it to demonstrate that the average since 1922 is 67.61% to 32.39%, and denotes that despite all of the Democratic/progressive and/or conservative/republican engineering, the mean has barely budged, why?

becasue guess what? we are not all gifted with the same talents, ambitions or grit. Theres is now and always has been the top quartile or third and the top quartile inside that bracket...and there will always be the lower quartiles.

Theres helpless and clueless and talented...and thats the way it works, there is no conspiracy.

We are an upwardly mobile society ( joe or anyone else is welcome to post the alike averages/ distributions of the USSR's or Chinas 'wealth' etc. they weren't and aren't models of efficiency/success in making it possible to deliver/develop the greatest good over wide swatches of their populations ) and though it appears that there are laggards, there always has been and always will be....people are not blocks of wood, their success or failure cannot be manipulated beyond providing the chance or opportunity to be a 'success' or 'fail', and where in everyone has the same status or access by degree to the same appurtenances/wealth etc.

 

[Wry Catcher]

"and he's bigoted against Mormons, too.... waaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhh".

Because, hey, if you are going to whine about everything that offended your precious little sensibilities over the last two years, you can't leave that out.



How is offshoring NOT treason?

How is the 1% not the enemy? They certainly aren't my friends, therefore they must be the enemy.

Incidently,I think there should a FAIR distribution of wealth. So do most Americans. What saves you guys is people don't realize how skewed the numbers are.

good point. This is from my Krugman thread:

His 2 1/2 min closing argument here:

Paul Krugman - C-SPAN Video Library

what the wealth distribution is
what people think it is
what people would like it to be

this is an upwardly mobile society, the numbers have barely moved since they started collecting them, its a red herring.


example-

Table 4: Share of wealth held by the Bottom 99% and Top 1% in the United States, 1922-2010.

Bottom 99 percent- second column, Top 1 percent

1922 63.3% 36.7%
1929 55.8% 44.2%
1933 66.7% 33.3%
1939 63.6% 36.4%
1945 70.2% 29.8%
1949 72.9% 27.1%
1953 68.8% 31.2%
1962 68.2% 31.8%
1965 65.6% 34.4%
1969 68.9% 31.1%
1972 70.9% 29.1%
1976 80.1% 19.9%
1979 79.5% 20.5%
1981 75.2% 24.8%
1983 69.1% 30.9%
1986 68.1% 31.9%
1989 64.3% 35.7%
1992 62.8% 37.2%
1995 61.5% 38.5%
1998 61.9% 38.1%
2001 66.6% 33.4%
2004 65.7% 34.3%
2007 65.4% 34.6%
2010 64.6% 35.4%

Who Rules America: Wealth, Income, and Power

Approx. 300,000,000 diverse Americans control 64.6% if the wealth. Yet how much debt to they have? And .01% control how much wealth?

Mark Twain is alleged to have said, "There are liars, damn liars and statistics".

 

[Trajan]

good point. This is from my Krugman thread:

what the wealth distribution is
what people think it is
what people would like it to be

this is an upwardly mobile society, the numbers have barely moved since they started collecting them, its a red herring.


example-

Table 4: Share of wealth held by the Bottom 99% and Top 1% in the United States, 1922-2010.

Bottom 99 percent- second column, Top 1 percent

1922 63.3% 36.7%
1929 55.8% 44.2%
1933 66.7% 33.3%
1939 63.6% 36.4%
1945 70.2% 29.8%
1949 72.9% 27.1%
1953 68.8% 31.2%
1962 68.2% 31.8%
1965 65.6% 34.4%
1969 68.9% 31.1%
1972 70.9% 29.1%
1976 80.1% 19.9%
1979 79.5% 20.5%
1981 75.2% 24.8%
1983 69.1% 30.9%
1986 68.1% 31.9%
1989 64.3% 35.7%
1992 62.8% 37.2%
1995 61.5% 38.5%
1998 61.9% 38.1%
2001 66.6% 33.4%
2004 65.7% 34.3%
2007 65.4% 34.6%
2010 64.6% 35.4%

Who Rules America: Wealth, Income, and Power

Approx. 300,000,000 diverse Americans control 64.6% if the wealth. Yet how much debt to they have? And .01% control how much wealth?

Mark Twain is alleged to have said, "There are liars, damn liars and statistics".

their debt is their issue, why does that matter?


so, 1% wasn't enough, now we're into .01% , you have to be pretty desperate to have to slice the bologna that thin.

oh and your Twain quote doesn't really apply here dopey......