Top 8% Own 85%

[Toddsterpatriot]

They're doing fine because they are attracting businesses over non-right to work states.

That's besides the fact that the cost of living is different depending on where you go. A $300,000 house here is a large beautiful house in a development. A $300,000 house in other places is almost the ghetto.

About eight years ago, I had a kid that moved here from New York to go to school. I generally charged at the time around $500.00 per apartment give or take. He told me that if I could magically take my property, move it to the outskirts of NYC, I could easily get $1,800 for each of my apartments.

While people in the south make less money, they also have a much lower cost of living. Watch HGTV sometime when people are buying houses, and take note of what $700,000 will buy you if you are looking for a home in the NE states. It's ridiculous.

They still make less. And as I have shown, non union workers make less than union workers. All this making less leaves us with stagnant wages, growing inequality and a slow economy. That is bad for everybody.

Which won't change with 11 million illegals driving wages down.

We probably wouldn't have an immigration problem if unions were strong. They aren't big on people coming in and working for cheap.

We probably wouldn't have an immigration problem if unions were strong. They aren't big on people coming in and working for cheap.

BS. None of the thug unions have come out for building a wall or booting the illegals.

They have been anti immigration and probably would be now if they weren't so weakened.
Immigration policies of American labor unions - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Ancient history is interesting. I'm talking about now.
Maybe they're weak because they aren't currently anti-illegal.

 

[Brain357]

They still make less. And as I have shown, non union workers make less than union workers. All this making less leaves us with stagnant wages, growing inequality and a slow economy. That is bad for everybody.

Which won't change with 11 million illegals driving wages down.

We probably wouldn't have an immigration problem if unions were strong. They aren't big on people coming in and working for cheap.

We probably wouldn't have an immigration problem if unions were strong. They aren't big on people coming in and working for cheap.

BS. None of the thug unions have come out for building a wall or booting the illegals.

They have been anti immigration and probably would be now if they weren't so weakened.
Immigration policies of American labor unions - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Ancient history is interesting. I'm talking about now.
Maybe they're weak because they aren't currently anti-illegal.

It is hardly ancient. They are weak because of the Republican attacks. Thanks for the slow economy.

I think they would be better off being anti-illegal. It certainly isn't helping wages.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Everyone is equal in Cuba.
Look at their massive economic growth!

Really?
Cuba’s Reforms Fail to Reduce Growing Inequality | Inter Press Service

Even Commies have inequality?
Maybe it's a force of nature?

Inequality is good for an economy, just not too much. When there is too much is slows the economy.

Inequality is good for an economy, just not too much.

What is the exact right amount? How do you know?

When there is too much is slows the economy.

Why?

Because the affluent tend to save more of what they earn rather than spend it, as more and more of the nation’s income goes to people at the top income brackets, there isn’t enough demand for goods and services to maintain strong growth, and attempts to bridge that gap with debt feed a boom-bust cycle of crises, the report argues. High inequality can feed on itself, as the wealthy use their resources to influence the political system toward policies that help maintain that advantage, like low tax rates on high incomes and low estate taxes, and underinvestment in education and infrastructure.
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/06/upshot/alarm-on-income-inequality-from-a-mainstream-source.html

Because the affluent tend to save more of what they earn rather than spend it

And savings is bad for the economy?

High inequality can feed on itself, as the wealthy use their resources to influence the political system toward policies that help maintain that advantage, like low tax rates on high incomes

When Reagan left office, the top tax rate was 28%. It's now over 40%.
Is that fixing inequality?
Maybe they meant corporate tax rates? Nope, we have the highest in the world.

 

[kaz]

I already gave several examples of corporations getting caught colluding to hold down workers wages. Yes it does happen. Most just don't get caught.

Right to work for less states aren't really doing that great.

They're doing fine because they are attracting businesses over non-right to work states.

That's besides the fact that the cost of living is different depending on where you go. A $300,000 house here is a large beautiful house in a development. A $300,000 house in other places is almost the ghetto.

About eight years ago, I had a kid that moved here from New York to go to school. I generally charged at the time around $500.00 per apartment give or take. He told me that if I could magically take my property, move it to the outskirts of NYC, I could easily get $1,800 for each of my apartments.

While people in the south make less money, they also have a much lower cost of living. Watch HGTV sometime when people are buying houses, and take note of what $700,000 will buy you if you are looking for a home in the NE states. It's ridiculous.

They still make less. And as I have shown, non union workers make less than union workers. All this making less leaves us with stagnant wages, growing inequality and a slow economy. That is bad for everybody.

Which won't change with 11 million illegals driving wages down.

We probably wouldn't have an immigration problem if unions were strong. They aren't big on people coming in and working for cheap

That so, Sparky, show where Unions say that about the Democrat party

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Which won't change with 11 million illegals driving wages down.

We probably wouldn't have an immigration problem if unions were strong. They aren't big on people coming in and working for cheap.

We probably wouldn't have an immigration problem if unions were strong. They aren't big on people coming in and working for cheap.

BS. None of the thug unions have come out for building a wall or booting the illegals.

They have been anti immigration and probably would be now if they weren't so weakened.
Immigration policies of American labor unions - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Ancient history is interesting. I'm talking about now.
Maybe they're weak because they aren't currently anti-illegal.

It is hardly ancient. They are weak because of the Republican attacks. Thanks for the slow economy.

I think they would be better off being anti-illegal. It certainly isn't helping wages.

It is hardly ancient.

The history of unions being anti-illegal is ancient history.

Thanks for the slow economy.

Thank God for United Airlines. How'd that work out again?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I really don't understand what you are pointing out other than the fact rich people are rich.

Well then you need to open your mind and read the article.

The system is set up purposely to enrich the rich and force debt on the rest of us.

The system? How? Force you in debt? How does anyone force you to be in debt? Did someone put a gun to your head, and demand you sign up for Discover Card?

What kind of idiocy, is this? The only reason stupid people are in debt, is because they want to buy stuff, they haven't earned the money to pay for.

I just posted an article of a Mexican who came here with no education, who didn't have a work permit, and created a company making drones. He's now a billionaire.

Stop complaining, and start working. Whiny spoiled brat Americanism. Grow up.

Most absurd.

Read the article dipshit. You don't understand jack.

Why do you defend government, the elites, and big business committing fraud to enrich themselves?

I have no debt and never use a credit card asshole. I am rather wealthy and retired at the age of 52. So, you don't know what the fuck you are talking about.

Only a dumb ass would defend 8% of the world's population having 85% of the world's wealth.

Only a dumb ass would defend 8% of the world's population having 85% of the world's wealth.

What's the proper amount for the top 8% to have?

 

[gipper]

I really don't understand what you are pointing out other than the fact rich people are rich.

Well then you need to open your mind and read the article.

The system is set up purposely to enrich the rich and force debt on the rest of us.

The system? How? Force you in debt? How does anyone force you to be in debt? Did someone put a gun to your head, and demand you sign up for Discover Card?

What kind of idiocy, is this? The only reason stupid people are in debt, is because they want to buy stuff, they haven't earned the money to pay for.

I just posted an article of a Mexican who came here with no education, who didn't have a work permit, and created a company making drones. He's now a billionaire.

Stop complaining, and start working. Whiny spoiled brat Americanism. Grow up.

Most absurd.

Read the article dipshit. You don't understand jack.

Why do you defend government, the elites, and big business committing fraud to enrich themselves?

I have no debt and never use a credit card asshole. I am rather wealthy and retired at the age of 52. So, you don't know what the fuck you are talking about.

Only a dumb ass would defend 8% of the world's population having 85% of the world's wealth.

Only a dumb ass would defend 8% of the world's population having 85% of the world's wealth.

What's the proper amount for the top 8% to have?

Don't know. What do you think it should be?

 

[Brain357]

Really?
Cuba’s Reforms Fail to Reduce Growing Inequality | Inter Press Service

Even Commies have inequality?
Maybe it's a force of nature?

Inequality is good for an economy, just not too much. When there is too much is slows the economy.

Inequality is good for an economy, just not too much.

What is the exact right amount? How do you know?

When there is too much is slows the economy.

Why?

Because the affluent tend to save more of what they earn rather than spend it, as more and more of the nation’s income goes to people at the top income brackets, there isn’t enough demand for goods and services to maintain strong growth, and attempts to bridge that gap with debt feed a boom-bust cycle of crises, the report argues. High inequality can feed on itself, as the wealthy use their resources to influence the political system toward policies that help maintain that advantage, like low tax rates on high incomes and low estate taxes, and underinvestment in education and infrastructure.
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/06/upshot/alarm-on-income-inequality-from-a-mainstream-source.html

Because the affluent tend to save more of what they earn rather than spend it

And savings is bad for the economy?

High inequality can feed on itself, as the wealthy use their resources to influence the political system toward policies that help maintain that advantage, like low tax rates on high incomes

When Reagan left office, the top tax rate was 28%. It's now over 40%.
Is that fixing inequality?
Maybe they meant corporate tax rates? Nope, we have the highest in the world.

Yes it is.
The rich actually pay very low rates.
Buffett says he's still paying lower tax rate than his secretary

 

[WelfareQueen]

I wonder if the OP will ever respond tot he following. Wonder what he's afraid of?



Our economic system has raised more people out of poverty around the world than any other economic system in human history. Why are people on the left so fucking ignorant?

Question: Name any economic system better than ours? Go ahead...I'm sure we'll all be waiting with baited breath.

Are you happy with a slow economy?

Who is....but the OP questions the underlying basis of our economic system. My question is simple. Name any economic system that is better?


The OP is an obvious left-wing moon bat pussy... I never expected any response from a brain dead moon-bat troll.....but if anyone else wants to take a shot at my question go for it.

Too much inequality slows an economy. Look at how slow ours is. What is wrong with recognizing that?
Inequality hurts economic growth, finds OECD research - OECD

I reject your term "inequality." No two human beings are equal. There is zero guarantee of equal outcomes. In this life some people win and some lose.

Why is that so hard for people on the left to accept?

 

[Brain357]

I wonder if the OP will ever respond tot he following. Wonder what he's afraid of?



Our economic system has raised more people out of poverty around the world than any other economic system in human history. Why are people on the left so fucking ignorant?

Question: Name any economic system better than ours? Go ahead...I'm sure we'll all be waiting with baited breath.

Are you happy with a slow economy?

Who is....but the OP questions the underlying basis of our economic system. My question is simple. Name any economic system that is better?


The OP is an obvious left-wing moon bat pussy... I never expected any response from a brain dead moon-bat troll.....but if anyone else wants to take a shot at my question go for it.

Too much inequality slows an economy. Look at how slow ours is. What is wrong with recognizing that?
Inequality hurts economic growth, finds OECD research - OECD

I reject your term "inequality." No two human beings are equal. There is zero guarantee of equal outcomes. In this life some people win and some lose.

Why is that so hard for people on the left to accept?

So you like a slow economy then? You can reject all you want, but it is hurting our economy and that is bad for everyone.

 

[Brain357]

I really don't understand what you are pointing out other than the fact rich people are rich.

Well then you need to open your mind and read the article.

The system is set up purposely to enrich the rich and force debt on the rest of us.

The system? How? Force you in debt? How does anyone force you to be in debt? Did someone put a gun to your head, and demand you sign up for Discover Card?

What kind of idiocy, is this? The only reason stupid people are in debt, is because they want to buy stuff, they haven't earned the money to pay for.

I just posted an article of a Mexican who came here with no education, who didn't have a work permit, and created a company making drones. He's now a billionaire.

Stop complaining, and start working. Whiny spoiled brat Americanism. Grow up.

Most absurd.

Read the article dipshit. You don't understand jack.

Why do you defend government, the elites, and big business committing fraud to enrich themselves?

I have no debt and never use a credit card asshole. I am rather wealthy and retired at the age of 52. So, you don't know what the fuck you are talking about.

Only a dumb ass would defend 8% of the world's population having 85% of the world's wealth.

Only a dumb ass would defend 8% of the world's population having 85% of the world's wealth.

What's the proper amount for the top 8% to have?

Don't know. What do you think it should be?

I think we will know it is about right when our economy gets moving again.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Everyone is equal in Cuba.
Look at their massive economic growth!

Really?
Cuba’s Reforms Fail to Reduce Growing Inequality | Inter Press Service

Even Commies have inequality?
Maybe it's a force of nature?

Inequality is good for an economy, just not too much. When there is too much is slows the economy.

Inequality is good for an economy, just not too much.

What is the exact right amount? How do you know?

When there is too much is slows the economy.

Why?

Because the affluent tend to save more of what they earn rather than spend it, as more and more of the nation’s income goes to people at the top income brackets, there isn’t enough demand for goods and services to maintain strong growth, and attempts to bridge that gap with debt feed a boom-bust cycle of crises, the report argues. High inequality can feed on itself, as the wealthy use their resources to influence the political system toward policies that help maintain that advantage, like low tax rates on high incomes and low estate taxes, and underinvestment in education and infrastructure.
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/06/upshot/alarm-on-income-inequality-from-a-mainstream-source.html

The top 10% of earners in this country pay nearly 70% of all collected income taxes by the government. If 70% is not enough for the top 10% to pay, how much should they be paying?

 

[SmokeALib]

Well then you need to open your mind and read the article.

The system is set up purposely to enrich the rich and force debt on the rest of us.

The system? How? Force you in debt? How does anyone force you to be in debt? Did someone put a gun to your head, and demand you sign up for Discover Card?

What kind of idiocy, is this? The only reason stupid people are in debt, is because they want to buy stuff, they haven't earned the money to pay for.

I just posted an article of a Mexican who came here with no education, who didn't have a work permit, and created a company making drones. He's now a billionaire.

Stop complaining, and start working. Whiny spoiled brat Americanism. Grow up.

Most absurd.

Read the article dipshit. You don't understand jack.

Why do you defend government, the elites, and big business committing fraud to enrich themselves?

I have no debt and never use a credit card asshole. I am rather wealthy and retired at the age of 52. So, you don't know what the fuck you are talking about.

Only a dumb ass would defend 8% of the world's population having 85% of the world's wealth.

Only a dumb ass would defend 8% of the world's population having 85% of the world's wealth.

What's the proper amount for the top 8% to have?

Don't know. What do you think it should be?

I think we will know it is about right when our economy gets moving again.

The economy won't get moving again until we get these braindead leftists voted out of office.

 

[WelfareQueen]

I wonder if the OP will ever respond tot he following. Wonder what he's afraid of?



Our economic system has raised more people out of poverty around the world than any other economic system in human history. Why are people on the left so fucking ignorant?

Question: Name any economic system better than ours? Go ahead...I'm sure we'll all be waiting with baited breath.

Are you happy with a slow economy?

Who is....but the OP questions the underlying basis of our economic system. My question is simple. Name any economic system that is better?


The OP is an obvious left-wing moon bat pussy... I never expected any response from a brain dead moon-bat troll.....but if anyone else wants to take a shot at my question go for it.

Too much inequality slows an economy. Look at how slow ours is. What is wrong with recognizing that?
Inequality hurts economic growth, finds OECD research - OECD

I reject your term "inequality." No two human beings are equal. There is zero guarantee of equal outcomes. In this life some people win and some lose.

Why is that so hard for people on the left to accept?

So you like a slow economy then? You can reject all you want, but it is hurting our economy and that is bad for everyone.

How much money will you take from the people you don't like?

40%--50%-90%?

And remember....they earned their money....not you.

So what is fair? How much will you steal from those 8% and who will you define as the winners that get to keep money they did not earn?

 

[Brain357]

Really?
Cuba’s Reforms Fail to Reduce Growing Inequality | Inter Press Service

Even Commies have inequality?
Maybe it's a force of nature?

Inequality is good for an economy, just not too much. When there is too much is slows the economy.

Inequality is good for an economy, just not too much.

What is the exact right amount? How do you know?

When there is too much is slows the economy.

Why?

Because the affluent tend to save more of what they earn rather than spend it, as more and more of the nation’s income goes to people at the top income brackets, there isn’t enough demand for goods and services to maintain strong growth, and attempts to bridge that gap with debt feed a boom-bust cycle of crises, the report argues. High inequality can feed on itself, as the wealthy use their resources to influence the political system toward policies that help maintain that advantage, like low tax rates on high incomes and low estate taxes, and underinvestment in education and infrastructure.
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/06/upshot/alarm-on-income-inequality-from-a-mainstream-source.html

The top 10% of earners in this country pay nearly 70% of all collected income taxes by the government. If 70% is not enough for the top 10% to pay, how much should they be paying?

The rates are still low. They pay most of the income taxes because of all the inequality. Nobody else has money to pay.

 

[WelfareQueen]

Even Commies have inequality?
Maybe it's a force of nature?

Inequality is good for an economy, just not too much. When there is too much is slows the economy.

Inequality is good for an economy, just not too much.

What is the exact right amount? How do you know?

When there is too much is slows the economy.

Why?

Because the affluent tend to save more of what they earn rather than spend it, as more and more of the nation’s income goes to people at the top income brackets, there isn’t enough demand for goods and services to maintain strong growth, and attempts to bridge that gap with debt feed a boom-bust cycle of crises, the report argues. High inequality can feed on itself, as the wealthy use their resources to influence the political system toward policies that help maintain that advantage, like low tax rates on high incomes and low estate taxes, and underinvestment in education and infrastructure.
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/06/upshot/alarm-on-income-inequality-from-a-mainstream-source.html

The top 10% of earners in this country pay nearly 70% of all collected income taxes by the government. If 70% is not enough for the top 10% to pay, how much should they be paying?

The rates are still low. They pay most of the income taxes because of all the inequality. Nobody else has money to pay.

How much money should the Government take from the people you do not like? What percentage is fair in your opinion?

 

[Brain357]

The system? How? Force you in debt? How does anyone force you to be in debt? Did someone put a gun to your head, and demand you sign up for Discover Card?

What kind of idiocy, is this? The only reason stupid people are in debt, is because they want to buy stuff, they haven't earned the money to pay for.

I just posted an article of a Mexican who came here with no education, who didn't have a work permit, and created a company making drones. He's now a billionaire.

Stop complaining, and start working. Whiny spoiled brat Americanism. Grow up.

Most absurd.

Read the article dipshit. You don't understand jack.

Why do you defend government, the elites, and big business committing fraud to enrich themselves?

I have no debt and never use a credit card asshole. I am rather wealthy and retired at the age of 52. So, you don't know what the fuck you are talking about.

Only a dumb ass would defend 8% of the world's population having 85% of the world's wealth.

Only a dumb ass would defend 8% of the world's population having 85% of the world's wealth.

What's the proper amount for the top 8% to have?

Don't know. What do you think it should be?

I think we will know it is about right when our economy gets moving again.

The economy won't get moving again until we get these braindead leftists voted out of office.

Yes cause republican policies work? The bush economy sucked. Scott Walker does everything in the republican playbook and WI sucks. The only strong repub states have money (oil) coming out of the ground.

 

[Brain357]

Inequality is good for an economy, just not too much. When there is too much is slows the economy.

Inequality is good for an economy, just not too much.

What is the exact right amount? How do you know?

When there is too much is slows the economy.

Why?

Because the affluent tend to save more of what they earn rather than spend it, as more and more of the nation’s income goes to people at the top income brackets, there isn’t enough demand for goods and services to maintain strong growth, and attempts to bridge that gap with debt feed a boom-bust cycle of crises, the report argues. High inequality can feed on itself, as the wealthy use their resources to influence the political system toward policies that help maintain that advantage, like low tax rates on high incomes and low estate taxes, and underinvestment in education and infrastructure.
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/06/upshot/alarm-on-income-inequality-from-a-mainstream-source.html

The top 10% of earners in this country pay nearly 70% of all collected income taxes by the government. If 70% is not enough for the top 10% to pay, how much should they be paying?

The rates are still low. They pay most of the income taxes because of all the inequality. Nobody else has money to pay.

How much money should the Government take from the people you do not like? What percentage is fair in your opinion?

I don't really think tax rates are the issue. Lowering them clearly did not fix the economy when bush tried it.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Income inequality means that some are making much more than others. That's the way a capitalist system works; the more you produce--the more you make.

If you believe in capitalism, then you should have no problem with how much other people make. That's the way a capitalist system works. If you do have a problem with income inequality, then obviously you have a problem with capitalism.

Are the rich supposed to collude to pay workers less like the examples I have shown? That isn't good capitalism.

They don't collude anything.

A worker is only worth as much as another person that will do the same quality of work for the same money. That's how wages are decided.

If you make $15.00 per hour, and tell your boss you want $18.00 per hour, but he could find other people happy to take your job for $15.00, that's the route he will take.

It's not just monkey jobs, it's all jobs including mine. If I tell my boss I need another two bucks an hour to stay on the job, he has to evaluate whether or not he can replace me and my quality of work. If he cannot, I make more money. If he believes he can, he tells me to take my demands and go pound a salt bag.

Big corporations are not the largest employer in America--small businesses are, and they are not colluding with anybody. The biggest problem we have in the US is foreign workers. That's because they screw up the supply and demand process. By allowing them to enter this country, they create an endless supply of workers. And as supply and demand dictates, the more supply and lower demand, the lower the price.

I already gave several examples of corporations getting caught colluding to hold down workers wages. Yes it does happen. Most just don't get caught.

Right to work for less states aren't really doing that great.

They're doing fine because they are attracting businesses over non-right to work states.

That's besides the fact that the cost of living is different depending on where you go. A $300,000 house here is a large beautiful house in a development. A $300,000 house in other places is almost the ghetto.

About eight years ago, I had a kid that moved here from New York to go to school. I generally charged at the time around $500.00 per apartment give or take. He told me that if I could magically take my property, move it to the outskirts of NYC, I could easily get $1,800 for each of my apartments.

While people in the south make less money, they also have a much lower cost of living. Watch HGTV sometime when people are buying houses, and take note of what $700,000 will buy you if you are looking for a home in the NE states. It's ridiculous.

What we know about RTW
To sum up, this study has found that worker-friendly states are significantly healthier, are more productive, have less poverty, and with citizens who enjoy longer life spans. In four of the seven measures (GDP per capita, poverty, insurance and life expectancy rates) so-called “right-to-work” states come out significantly (and statistically) worse.

These findings have broad policy implications in those states where lawmakers are wrongly considering RTW measures, and should inform the good efforts of union members and allies to quell those efforts. Instead of pursuing laws that actually lower the standard of living in their states, policy makers should look for ways to elevate everyone’s standard of living. Enacting RTW laws is not only misguided, but in fact counterproductive to achieving such ends. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. once said, “In our glorious fight for civil rights, we must guard against being fooled by false slogans, as ‘right to work.’ It provides no ‘rights’ and no ‘works’. Its purpose is to destroy labor unions and the freedom of collective bargaining.”[26] The evidence suggests that Dr. King was correct in this belief, and that those who would advocate for a state to enact RTW laws would also be lowering the standard of living for that state’s residents.

Poverty, Productivity, and Public Health: The Effects of

Gee, from the NEA, gosh what a surprise.

 

[SmokeALib]

Most absurd.

Read the article dipshit. You don't understand jack.

Why do you defend government, the elites, and big business committing fraud to enrich themselves?

I have no debt and never use a credit card asshole. I am rather wealthy and retired at the age of 52. So, you don't know what the fuck you are talking about.

Only a dumb ass would defend 8% of the world's population having 85% of the world's wealth.

Only a dumb ass would defend 8% of the world's population having 85% of the world's wealth.

What's the proper amount for the top 8% to have?

Don't know. What do you think it should be?

I think we will know it is about right when our economy gets moving again.

The economy won't get moving again until we get these braindead leftists voted out of office.

Yes cause republican policies work? The bush economy sucked. Scott Walker does everything in the republican playbook and WI sucks. The only strong repub states have money (oil) coming out of the ground.

Wrong fuckstick. My company has furloughed 40 percent of its workforce since you fools voted "The Blamer" into office. My 401k was going up, not down. When Bush was in office, I was writing my own paycheck. Now, I'm just barely hanging in.