The rich get richer and the poorer remain poorer?

[thereisnospoon]

While America certainly has its share of people in chronic poverty and those with vast wealth, we are an economically mobile society. There are no class or cast systems that might prevent anyone with initiative from bettering their station in life. IRS data tracking the same group of taxpayers between 1999 and 2007 showed that Americans can move from one economic group to another fairly quickly.For example, nearly 60% of taxpayers who began in the lowest income group in 1999, moved to a higher income group by 2007. Conversely, roughly 40% of taxpayers who started out in the highest income group moved to lower income groups within eight years.
Official Statistics on Inequality, the Top 1%, and Redistribution | Tax Foundation

Hey lets just go on our merry way here in America. There is no problem. It's just the jealous poor people bitching about whatever they bitch about.

One day, when the ultra rich control 60% of the nations income, will you be surprised that the ultra rich pay an even higher percentage of income tax?

How about if the ultra rich have 80% of the nations income. Still be surprised that they pay the bulk of the income tax.

Them poor ultra rich people. I bet you feel for them. All the vitriol and jealousy directed at them. Poor poor ultra wealthy people.

But I do want to be clear about one thing. I could give a flying fuck less if the ultra rich people were taxed at 50% of their income. If you make 10 million a year and can't get by on 5 million a year, fuck ya is what I say. They don't have an income problem, they must have a spending problem.

For you to spew more nonsense than what is in that post is virtually impossible.

 

[ScienceRocks]

Making the poor poorer and limiting upward mobility is evil.

I'll never support competing with China on slave labor.

 

[thereisnospoon]

The Super Bowl was a classic example of inequality. One team won...the other lost. What should be done about that?

So you think life is just a game eh? Well if that's the case, the ultra wealthy done won the "Super Bowl of Life" for the past many many years.

To bad there is not more competition for them. But hell, when you own the field you play on and the umpires to, the outcome is preordained. Right?

I see nothing but whining from you here.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Time to mandate 1,000 times law on ceo, board members and upper management compared to the lowest paid. This way corporations spend more of their profits on paying better wages to the works and expansion.

Yes. This is precisely what is needed. More mandates from a dysfunctional government which for only God only knows it cannot get its own fiscal house in order.
Tell ya what Matty boy, let the geniuses in Washington limit their own pay and benefits FIRST, then come and talk to the private sector.

 

[ScienceRocks]

The producer and the demander is the worker...90% of the work is poor to middle class.

 

[thereisnospoon]

It ought not surprise us that as the American workers purchasing power declines (from 1972 on according to most marco-economists) that the wealthy started paying a larger share of the FEDERAL income tax burden.

But if one compares the tax burden the affluent pay (by percentage rather than simply arithematically) one notes that the affluent have more puchasing power than ever while the working classes have far less.

Basically the very afflient are becoming more affluent and the working classes (the bottom 80% or so) are losing puchasing power.

I am far better educated than my father, I worked as professional while he worked as an unskilled dirty white collar laborer.

But his retirement plans, and his income's purchasing power was much much MUCH better than mine was or ever will be now.

And I am NOT the generational exception to this trend, I am rather typical of the boomers V their WWII generation parents.

I am (we were) better educated, I (we) worked more hours and I (we) had less purchasing power than my (our) father's generation.

Perhaps you chose the wrong career.
I find is remarkable how you whiners can so easily lay the blame on others for your own issues.

 

[Bombur]

It ought not surprise us that as the American workers purchasing power declines (from 1972 on according to most marco-economists) that the wealthy started paying a larger share of the FEDERAL income tax burden.

But if one compares the tax burden the affluent pay (by percentage rather than simply arithematically) one notes that the affluent have more puchasing power than ever while the working classes have far less.

Basically the very afflient are becoming more affluent and the working classes (the bottom 80% or so) are losing puchasing power.

I am far better educated than my father, I worked as professional while he worked as an unskilled dirty white collar laborer.

But his retirement plans, and his income's purchasing power was much much MUCH better than mine was or ever will be now.

And I am NOT the generational exception to this trend, I am rather typical of the boomers V their WWII generation parents.

I am (we were) better educated, I (we) worked more hours and I (we) had less purchasing power than my (our) father's generation.

Perhaps you chose the wrong career.
I find is remarkable how you whiners can so easily lay the blame on others for your own issues.

Leave it to the party of free market economics to completely ignore market economics when it suits them.



I never thought it would be so hard to convince conservatives that markets matter. It is like they are just waiting to complain about lazy people because their understanding of economics is so simplistic.

 

[dannyboys]

"Mommy! Billy's daddy bought him a new bike. When is daddy going to buy me a new bike so I can be like Billy?"
The LIB whiners here can't fathom the reality that throughout the history of human existence there have always been the 'makers, who end up with more than the 'takers'. It's part of the human condition.
Only the LIBs/communists/Marxists around the world live with the delusion that man-kind isn't really basically an aggressive avarice animal. News flash LIBs. That is the definition of mankind and no number of MSNBC 'Metros and Bull Dykes and Race whores and 'posers' screaming at the moon will ever change mankind.
Go live in fucking Mumbai and find out what real inequality looks like.

"Mommy, Billy's dad robbed us and bought his kid a bike and now we can't afford to fix the bike I have." "Well Johny, Billy's dad bought the police department so now we just get fucked and the only thing we can do about it is smile."

Keep smiling dannyboys, keep smiling.

Don't worry I am smiling all the to my off-shore accounts. And you can keep watching the mail for your welfare cheque and food stamps. See? We're both smiling.
Oh I forgot. The cops who you claim were bought off by Billy's old man are smiling too.
Enjoy todays 'Super-size Biggie' and fries. I'll stick with my imported Cote du Rhone and lobster.
You would give your right arm to have what I've have earned in life. (And then what would be hilarious is you'd do whatever it took to keep it away from the 'Takers' like you.)

 

[thereisnospoon]

Making the poor poorer and limiting upward mobility is evil.

I'll never support competing with China on slave labor.

Who does that?
We make ourselves richer or poorer through our efforts or lack thereof.
This is a very simple concept.
Those who whine about 'inequality' are convinced the government should step in and assist them.
The worst thing you want to hear is "I'm with the government. I'm here to help".

 

[Kosh]

The rich get richer and the poorer remain poorer?

Darn that Nancy Pelosi and all those far left politicians who's net worth has almost grown ten fold since they came into power in 2006.

 

[RandomVariable]

"Mommy! Billy's daddy bought him a new bike. When is daddy going to buy me a new bike so I can be like Billy?"
The LIB whiners here can't fathom the reality that throughout the history of human existence there have always been the 'makers, who end up with more than the 'takers'. It's part of the human condition.
Only the LIBs/communists/Marxists around the world live with the delusion that man-kind isn't really basically an aggressive avarice animal. News flash LIBs. That is the definition of mankind and no number of MSNBC 'Metros and Bull Dykes and Race whores and 'posers' screaming at the moon will ever change mankind.
Go live in fucking Mumbai and find out what real inequality looks like.

"Mommy, Billy's dad robbed us and bought his kid a bike and now we can't afford to fix the bike I have." "Well Johny, Billy's dad bought the police department so now we just get fucked and the only thing we can do about it is smile."

Keep smiling dannyboys, keep smiling.

Don't worry I am smiling all the to my off-shore accounts. And you can keep watching the mail for your welfare cheque and food stamps. See? We're both smiling.
Oh I forgot. The cops who you claim were bought off by Billy's old man are smiling too.
Enjoy todays 'Super-size Biggie' and fries. I'll stick with my imported Cote du Rhone and lobster.
You would give your right arm to have what I've have earned in life. (And then what would be hilarious is you'd do whatever it took to keep it away from the 'Takers' like you.)

That was probably THE worst attempt of someone trying to something they are not I have ever seen.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Making the poor poorer and limiting upward mobility is evil.

I'll never support competing with China on slave labor.

Aside from an unfeeling universe that made you a drooling moron, who's limiting your upward mobility? (Hint: no amount of legislation will make you any smarter, or make the universe care.)

 

[RandomVariable]

Making the poor poorer and limiting upward mobility is evil.

I'll never support competing with China on slave labor.

Aside from an unfeeling universe that made you a drooling moron, who's limiting your upward mobility? (Hint: no amount of legislation will make you any smarter, or make the universe care.)

Capitalism is survival of the fittest. Democracy is for the people, by the people. The Democracy can use some capitalism for the betterment of its people. Capitalism can use some democracy for the betterment of itself. In the end one will thrive and one will die.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Making the poor poorer and limiting upward mobility is evil.

I'll never support competing with China on slave labor.

Aside from an unfeeling universe that made you a drooling moron, who's limiting your upward mobility? (Hint: no amount of legislation will make you any smarter, or make the universe care.)

Capitalism is survival of the fittest. Democracy is for the people, by the people. The Democracy can use some capitalism for the betterment of its people. Capitalism can use some democracy for the betterment of itself. In the end one will thrive and one will die.

The problem you have is this is not a democracy.

 

[Indeependent]

Making the poor poorer and limiting upward mobility is evil.

I'll never support competing with China on slave labor.

Aside from an unfeeling universe that made you a drooling moron, who's limiting your upward mobility? (Hint: no amount of legislation will make you any smarter, or make the universe care.)

Most lending institutions.
There are lots of bright, driven graduates who have good business plans who can't start a business.
Yes, yes, now you're going to repeat the Fox mantra than anyone can start a business by selling the $269.00 worth of old stuff in their closet.
Funny that the talking heads who say this usually have quite successful parents and all these talking heads accomplished in life were sucking up to someone who owns a media outlet.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Making the poor poorer and limiting upward mobility is evil.

I'll never support competing with China on slave labor.

Aside from an unfeeling universe that made you a drooling moron, who's limiting your upward mobility? (Hint: no amount of legislation will make you any smarter, or make the universe care.)

Most lending institutions.
There are lots of bright, driven graduates who have good business plans who can't start a business.
Yes, yes, now you're going to repeat the Fox mantra than anyone can start a business by selling the $269.00 worth of old stuff in their closet.
Funny that the talking heads who say this usually have quite successful parents and all these talking heads accomplished in life were sucking up to someone who owns a media outlet.

"Can't" .....Ok why not?
What's stopping them?

 

[thereisnospoon]

The producer and the demander is the worker...90% of the work is poor to middle class.

I think you are not in touch with reality.
What is your perception of "work"?
Be careful how you frame your answer.

 

[thereisnospoon]

It ought not surprise us that as the American workers purchasing power declines (from 1972 on according to most marco-economists) that the wealthy started paying a larger share of the FEDERAL income tax burden.

But if one compares the tax burden the affluent pay (by percentage rather than simply arithematically) one notes that the affluent have more puchasing power than ever while the working classes have far less.

Basically the very afflient are becoming more affluent and the working classes (the bottom 80% or so) are losing puchasing power.

I am far better educated than my father, I worked as professional while he worked as an unskilled dirty white collar laborer.

But his retirement plans, and his income's purchasing power was much much MUCH better than mine was or ever will be now.

And I am NOT the generational exception to this trend, I am rather typical of the boomers V their WWII generation parents.

I am (we were) better educated, I (we) worked more hours and I (we) had less purchasing power than my (our) father's generation.

Perhaps you chose the wrong career.
I find is remarkable how you whiners can so easily lay the blame on others for your own issues.

Leave it to the party of free market economics to completely ignore market economics when it suits them.



I never thought it would be so hard to convince conservatives that markets matter. It is like they are just waiting to complain about lazy people because their understanding of economics is so simplistic.

Can you please spare us the psycho-babble.

 

[Bombur]

Perhaps you chose the wrong career.
I find is remarkable how you whiners can so easily lay the blame on others for your own issues.

Leave it to the party of free market economics to completely ignore market economics when it suits them.



I never thought it would be so hard to convince conservatives that markets matter. It is like they are just waiting to complain about lazy people because their understanding of economics is so simplistic.

Can you please spare us the psycho-babble.

So first you make economics about "personal issues" and then you think others are guilty of "psycho-babble"?

ROFLMAO

 

[Cecilie1200]

Making the poor poorer and limiting upward mobility is evil.

I'll never support competing with China on slave labor.

Aside from an unfeeling universe that made you a drooling moron, who's limiting your upward mobility? (Hint: no amount of legislation will make you any smarter, or make the universe care.)

Capitalism is survival of the fittest. Democracy is for the people, by the people. The Democracy can use some capitalism for the betterment of its people. Capitalism can use some democracy for the betterment of itself. In the end one will thrive and one will die.

"She was the kind of person who lived for other people. You could always tell those other people by the persecuted look on their faces."