The risk of income inequality

[Brain357]

The solution to the income gap is not to bring down the rich but to raise up the poor.

How do we do that? Get the govt out of trying to manipulate our economy, eliminate corporate taxation (consumer pay it, not corportions), and incentivize investment in the USA.

in other words-----------create jobs through the private sector.

we should also improve our educational system, dump failures like common core and the teachers union, and allow school choice to every parent.

If you must involve the govt then let it fund job training for blue collar skills. We have a shortage of plumbers and electircians and carpenters and car mechanics. Get the kids off the ghetto streets and into job training.

So are you talking about eliminating corporate taxation no strings attached? Don't let spiderman hear you want to eliminate a tax.

How would you incentivize investment?

the opportunity to make a profit for your shareholders is all the inventive necessary for investment. How do you think Apple and Microsoft got big? not through govt incentives.

How many millions of people now have good paying jobs because of what Gates and Jobs invented?

Corporate taxes are NOT PAID BY CORPORATIONS, they are included in the price of the products and are paid by consumers.

But what makes you think they are going to make more profit doing anything here rather than overseas?

Of course the consumers pay the taxes, just like the consumers pay for all the very high paid executives.

 

[dblack]

I suspect that's why you refuse to accept it--because you can't become master of your own kingdom (i.e. private property)

Yep. That sums it up pretty well. For me anyway.

 

[blackhawk]

It sounds like your talking about a system where everyone has the basic necessities of life but little or nothing else seems to me innovation and creativity would go right out the window in something like that not really something that personally appeals to me.

I don't know why you'd believe that. I'm sure the media has lead you to believe human creativity would not exist but think about what your saying. Most of the world is owned by a infinitesimally small sector of people while the great majority are indebted, not allowed to do creative tasks at work because "work" is a form of robotic function. If everyone was not just scraping to get by and could have access to free education, creativity and innovation would soar! You'd be surprised how ingenious tribes can be! Have you ever studied indigenous peoples? Do you know what they did with nature before society became petroleum based? Their lively traditions have mostly faded and so we think our way is the only way but I'm by no means advocating some idiotic return to tribes! We should be a global community! When that many brains are humming without unnecessary violence and suffering, think of what can be done!

I mean don't take my word for it, if you are at all serious at least peak at a couple articles I linked in the link I posted. I don't deny your concern, it is legitimate but to just assume there would be no innovation because they'd be no profit motive is not very critical. It's like saying there would be no incentive to live well. of course we want to live as well as possible! Living excellently is what life is all about! But when excellence is mistaken for the utter devastation of our natural resources, it's a sad sight.

Just going to make a quick comment on the global community part and then call it a night a quick look at what is happening in Ukraine and Europe China eyeing some parts of Asia and take your pick in the Middle East makes being a global community all working together sound good in theory but not realistic.

 

[gnarlylove]

If you want to confiscate my income for your crusade, then go fly a kite. I'll fight you to my last breath.

I'm not confiscating anything of own because you never owned anything in the first place. there is no noncircular justification you can give for private property.

But don't take this to mean I'm coming to take anything you current use. I'm not reaching into your wallet or driving off with your car. You are so fearful and terrified that people want anything you use. That's not it! Those who own 40% of the world need to be held accountable. You don't even fit into the picture here. If anything, by everyone living more equally you'd stand to benefit from this instead of be pick pocketed! (noticing I didnt say we should all be exactly equal)

 

[gnarlylove]

Just going to make a quick comment on the global community part and then call it a night a quick look at what is happening in Ukraine and Europe China eyeing some parts of Asia and take your pick in the Middle East makes being a global community all working together sound good in theory but not realistic.

I know! It's way bad! But that's why we must understand what the causes are and it's power based. USA is the biggest terrorist state ever having funded other terrorist states in Nicaragua (Sandinista V Contras) and Al Qaeda up until 9/11 as internal records show to name two.

The whole point is when you recognize the problem it becomes a moral duty to stand up and fight this injustice. I totally hear what you're saying but I just ask that you don't dismiss this so easily. These are issues to be pondered deeply as they are no light matter. And to think humans cannot accomplish such a society may be what ends up happening, we kill ourselves off as a species, but that doesn't mean we should just pursue personal gain like the rest of them contributing to mass starvation and suffering. It's only going to get worse and the less we fight back the more they will take from us.

 

[thereisnospoon]

But you think people should want more stuff. That's gross materialism. Remember saying this?:

"We need to overhaul our value system to downplay selfish desires and superficial consumption"

So why do you want them to have better pay and benefits?

Good question, glad you asked. i'm all for everyone doing their share, that's what tis all about b-ri!

But just owning a fridge doesn't mean there's food in it. These people, many of whom I know personally, deserve access to nutritious food, clean water, basic health care but don't get it. They have a human right to these things because research shows that people who live in poverty are 10 times more likely to have health problems. It makes no sense to make those born into poverty suffer for being born but we do it every day.

I disagree with your assertion that people of limited means do not have access to healthy foods.
I believe and the proof is there that eating healthy is actually less expensive than eating unhealthy foods.
For example. poor people tend to eat more convenience foods, junk food and fast food.
It's just fact. If one walks about the grocery store, and spots the shopper who has the appearance of limited means, you'll see more junk and convenience foods in the shopping cart. Go to a fast food joint. Typically those who drive the least maintained vehicles are fast food consumers.
How many instances where the buying habits of those who use food coupons or EBT cards do not choose the healthier options...Tons. It's a common complaint.
I have spent the better part of the last 15 or so years working in people's homes.
I have been in the homes of low income people. The things I see just amaze me.
I don't make a ton of money. I live beneath my means. Which means, clipping coupons. Not spending unwisely. Steering clear of wants and taking care of needs.
But when I see the way poorer people spend their money, it is shocking.
as far as I am concerned people who are struggling should not even know what the inside of a fast food restaurant looks like. Yet, the evidence of the trip to Burger King or Wendy's is evident. Why would I want to feed my family this stuff if I am struggling to make ends meet?
Hell, with a little imagination and some effort in the kitchen I can make a $15 London Broil and a $7 whole chicken last me a week and never eat the same meal twice in 7 days.
My conclusion is that if poor people or anyone else for that matter wanted to eat healthy, they could do so with a little time and effort.
One issue of health that seems to be prevalent among poor people is obesity.
Now if a person is supposedly under fed, get so fat? The answers to that are above.
Look, I am no angel when it comes to eating 'shit'...Every so often I'll get lazy and instead of making a salad and a sandwich, Ill slide over to a fast food restaurant. And guess what? Not only did I eat junk, I paid WAY too much money for it. My typical fast food selection costs between 7 and 8 dollars.
That sandwich and salad or can of Campbell's Chunky Chicken costs about a dollar.

 

[GWV5903]

When income inequalities persist, violence ensues.

History would agree with that, but there has never been a society quite like ours...

Is this the aggressive side of your passive beliefs?

Very hypocritical coming from a liberal, you advocate or better yet suggest violence is the result...

The simple truth is you can't always get what you want!!

But if try sometime you get what you need...

Does the increased font size help with your feelings of inadequacy? Please point out where I advocated violence.

More proof you have not a clue what you're saying...

 

[gnarlylove]

I suspect that's why you refuse to accept it--because you can't become master of your own kingdom (i.e. private property)

Yep. That sums it up pretty well. For me anyway.

So that's why government is your enemy? Additionally, it sounds like your motive for maintain concentrations of power, so that "freedom" to exploit others and the resources remains in tact. You do realize that we are facing the end of civilization as we know it?

 

[dblack]

I suspect that's why you refuse to accept it--because you can't become master of your own kingdom (i.e. private property)

Yep. That sums it up pretty well. For me anyway.

So that's why government is your enemy?

Depends on the government. Those that defend property rights are my friends.

 

[gnarlylove]

Those are the only governments in existence. Governments are predicated on the defense of the elite's property and to some extent that of others. We think because we don't have kings that somehow we live in a world governed by better principles. That is some white washing and a grave misunderstanding of how the world works. More and more there are only two classes, the precariat and the elite. And I'm not saying one is good and one is bad, this is just reality.

 

[gnarlylove]

What I'd be most interested in is hearing a non-circular, nontautological defense of private property.

So drawing up a title deed and claiming something as yours is justified how? It's exactly how we justified the genocide of native americans. They lacked the piece of paper that proved they owned the land so we drew it up and bam, its ours.

Now 'use' is not the same thing as ownership. And just because your tooth brush is not desired by anyone but yourself does not mean you own that tooth brush, it means you end up being it's only user. Owning anything is pure hypothetical and not real, its psychological dribble, but perhaps I just haven't heard a clear defense...

 

[dblack]

Now 'use' is not the same thing as ownership.

Of course it is. That's the entire reason we bother with the concept of property in the first place - to decide who gets to use what.

 

[Againsheila]

We never intended Social Security to be your total retirement system. It was expected that workers would own homes and have a financial nest egg to ensure they could retire comfortably
Then we allowed ourselves to destroy that nestegg. Leave a worker barely enough to live on and forget about saving for the future. Go into debt if you want your children to be educated. God forbid you get seriously ill and your life savings are gone. This is the society we have created and it is an embarrassment for a great nation

Bullshit.

No one's destroyed any nest egg. People don't bother to even save anymore and it's not because someone else is stealing from them it's because they choose not to.

In many cases, it's because there is nothing left over to save. Hard to save what you don't have. We have more working people getting help from our government than at any other time in history. This is nothing short of corporate welfare.

 

[gnarlylove]

Now 'use' is not the same thing as ownership.

Of course it is. That's the entire reason we bother with the concept of property in the first place - to decide who gets to use what.

We can happily agree to disagree. What you are saying has all kinds of holes but I'm not about to challenge the central push for your existence: the right to control your domain. The only reason I can imagine you want your domain instead of sharing is because people are nuts. But people wouldn't be nuts if we didn't have private property where most of the world has technically far less than nothing (i.e. debt).

 

[dblack]

Now 'use' is not the same thing as ownership.

Of course it is. That's the entire reason we bother with the concept of property in the first place - to decide who gets to use what.

We can happily agree to disagree.

Not if you propose eliminating property rights.

 

[gnarlylove]

Property is one of the main sources of human exploitation. TO advocate conventional property rights is advocating human exploitation and resource exploitation beyond what is sustainable. It fuels egoism and personal individualism. These core values are destroying chance for decent survival for future generations not to mention other species. Narrow sighted of individualism is creating two ultimate doom scenarios with Nuclear War and environmental degradation. Do you really think it's ok that we are currently creating the Sixth Extinction Event?

 

[dblack]

Property is one of the main sources of human exploitation. TO advocate conventional property rights is advocating human exploitation and resource exploitation beyond what is sustainable.

Obviously, I don't believe that, but for the sake of argument, let's play it your way. Who gets to use the toothbrush?

 

[gnarlylove]

No one want's to use your tooth brush except you. Maybe you're girlfriend might want to use it once on a camping trip where she forgot hers. But as we further drop this sensitive notion of ownership, there is no need for us all to own one of everything. Carpooling is just more sensible than not but is strongly discouraged by individualism. what's smarter than allowing the market to allow the private choice between cars is light rail that is highly efficient. But a free market was never meant to efficiently operate society, it has been designed to squeeze profit, which is not the same thing as life.

 

[AntiParty]

The big myth about income inequality that just won't die - The Week

Modern life is fraught with very expensive risks lurking around every corner. A sudden illness or accident could render you disabled and unable to work. A recession or economic restructuring could render you unemployed and render the skills you've spent your life learning useless. Reaching old age with inadequate savings could mean living your golden years in poverty.

Many societies have created robust social insurance systems to protect their populations from these kinds of risks. The U.S. has done so as well, but to a much lesser extent. Because social insurance in the U.S. is so inadequate, it is incumbent upon people to self-insure against these risks. That means they need to have enough wealth to draw upon as a cushion if they end up facing hard times. But here's where the social contract fails: When the bottom half of the country owns basically none of the country's wealth, they can't self-insure themselves against these risks. Instead, they must lead a relatively perilous life in which one misstep or mistake could wreck them and their families.

Great post.

I want to add that most people see "income inequality" and want to jump tot he conclusion that some people want everyone to get paid the same flat rate. The common misconception of Socialists.

In Socialists societies people vote for pay. It's not a flat pay, "everyone gets equal amounts".

And the Socialist Countries suffer the same as we do when Government gets involved. Australia is Socialism and let's their "congress" decide what is the best pay by voting. And their Congress is just as corrupt as any.

Communists are something different.

 

[dblack]

No one want's to use your tooth brush except you.

My toothbrush? Which one is mine?