Unequal distribution of wealth

[syrenn]

Wealth does not create jobs. Spending does. When companies spend they create jobs. When rich people accumulate wealth, jobs are not created.


Under the Bush tax cuts to the wealthiest (unpaid for cuts) America did not get more job creation.

Tax Returns: A Comprehensive Assessment of the Bush Administration's Record on Cutting Taxes — Center on Budget and Policy Priorities

Why is it the "wealthys" problem to create jobs? And you don't think the wealthy spend money?

The reason we're given to cut their taxes and coddle them is because they are the job creators! Now you want to let them off the hook for that too?

So, in the end, to combat the deficit the only sacrifices must be made by those least capable of sacrificing. The rich got theirs and should bear no burden.

Great! Sell that in an unemployment line!

Flat tax. Then everyone bleeds the same.

No i am not for letting anyone off the hook for paying their fair share of taxes. But that is just it, a FAIR share. If the government wants a % much from me they better better be taking the same % from all of you. It is NOT fair to take more from some and not others just based on how much they have and or don't have.

To combat the deficit we need to decrease spending. Look closely at what you are saying: The only people who should combat the defect and bear the burden are the "rich" because they can afford it.

 

[Bfgrn]

perhaps these have already been mentioned...

1. A wide income gap leads to deteriorating economic growth.
2. The consistently-widening income gap over the past 30 years points to a structural cause - if the cause is policy-related, it is important to understand what policies create this, and decide if the public accepts said policies.

No, you have the cause and effect ass backwards on #1.

You're saying that deteriorating economic growth leads to income disparity? Please explain..with some empirical data, if possible. The past 50 years of US data disagree.

You ask for 'empirical data', then make a claim without any?

As far as wealth disparity, here's what the past 50 years+ looks like.

 

[JBeukema]

Anyone who needs 99 months to find any job is not serious about working.

You pulled this number out from where, exactly?

 

[JBeukema]

Do not tell me you can't find a job. What you can't find is a job you WANT. Boo-freaking-hoo. My heart bleeds for you.

You honestly think there's no one out there that can't find a job or are you referring to someone who somehow can't find anything after 99 months?

Where are you getting this number from?

 

[8537]

No, you have the cause and effect ass backwards on #1.

You're saying that deteriorating economic growth leads to income disparity? Please explain..with some empirical data, if possible. The past 50 years of US data disagree.

The past two years trumps the past 50.

Oh, I see the problem here: You're basing your claim on a business cycle fluctuation....

and also forgetting that part of what caused the current mess was the previous widening disparity - the stagnant middle class incomes eroding purchasing power relative to the wealthiest.

 

[Revere]

You're saying that deteriorating economic growth leads to income disparity? Please explain..with some empirical data, if possible. The past 50 years of US data disagree.

The past two years trumps the past 50.

Oh, I see the problem here: You're basing your claim on a business cycle fluctuation....

and also forgetting that part of what caused the current mess was the previous widening disparity - the stagnant middle class incomes eroding purchasing power relative to the wealthiest.

What is the length of a typical recession?

No, mess causes the disparity, not the other way around.

 

[boedicca]

No, you have the cause and effect ass backwards on #1.

You're saying that deteriorating economic growth leads to income disparity? Please explain..with some empirical data, if possible. The past 50 years of US data disagree.

You ask for 'empirical data', then make a claim without any?

As far as wealth disparity, here's what the past 50 years+ looks like.

Oh the heartbreak of economic illiteracy.

What's missing from this manipulative graph is MONETARY and FISCAL POLICY.

Tax rates alone do not create a climate for healthy growth which creates jobs and increasing incomes throughout the labor force. You are far too focused on wealth and neglectful of what is necessary for job creation and the ability to earn an income.

 

[Revere]

Anyone who needs 99 months to find any job is not serious about working.

You pulled this number out from where, exactly?

99 months is the current unemployment benefit.

 

[8537]

No, you have the cause and effect ass backwards on #1.

You're saying that deteriorating economic growth leads to income disparity? Please explain..with some empirical data, if possible. The past 50 years of US data disagree.

You ask for 'empirical data', then make a claim without any?

The past 50 years of US data (as I stated in my post) are the evidence. Of course, you could also refer to a host of peer-reviewed economic articles demonstrating the connection.

 

[8537]

The past two years trumps the past 50.

Oh, I see the problem here: You're basing your claim on a business cycle fluctuation....

and also forgetting that part of what caused the current mess was the previous widening disparity - the stagnant middle class incomes eroding purchasing power relative to the wealthiest.

What is the length of a typical recession?

Probably 8 months or so.

No, mess causes the disparity, not the other way around.

Then how did the disparity grow so dramatically and consistently during the past 30 years as the economy generally grew?

 

[JBeukema]

No more socialism! We need [ame="http://www.amazon.com/Condition-Working-England-Penguin-Classics/dp/0140444866"]real capitalism[/ame]!

Bourgeoisie of the world... let's have a tea party!

 

[JBeukema]

Anyone who needs 99 months to find any job is not serious about working.

You pulled this number out from where, exactly?

99 months is the current unemployment benefit.

Source? Because I googled it and got a very different answer

Let me google that for you


You're off by a factor of four.

 

[JBeukema]

You can't squash Individuality, and expect to be compared in the same vein with our Forefathers. Your Brand is the path to Totalitarianism. You steal Liberty, and at the same time claim to champion it? Why is that?

Ask the FF's slaves...

 

[JBeukema]

Tax System Favors Wealth Over Work | Dissident Voice

 

[Bfgrn]

You're saying that deteriorating economic growth leads to income disparity? Please explain..with some empirical data, if possible. The past 50 years of US data disagree.

You ask for 'empirical data', then make a claim without any?

As far as wealth disparity, here's what the past 50 years+ looks like.

Oh the heartbreak of economic illiteracy.

What's missing from this manipulative graph is MONETARY and FISCAL POLICY.

Tax rates alone do not create a climate for healthy growth which creates jobs and increasing incomes throughout the labor force. You are far too focused on wealth and neglectful of what is necessary for job creation and the ability to earn an income.

Your emoting can't be based on facts. You don't know me, how much $$$ I made or make. And I never like to brag.

Here's what I do know, much of it from being on this planet since Harry Truman was president. There's no doubt in my mind that graph is accurate. We can argue about what caused the wealth disparity today that mirrors the Gilded age, but it does exist.

15 Mind-Blowing Facts About Wealth And Inequality In America

The rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer. Cliché, sure, but it's also more true than at any time since the Gilded Age.

The poor are getting poorer, wages are falling behind inflation, and social mobility is at an all-time low.

If you're in that top 1%, life is grand.


Read more: Wealth And Inequality In America

 

[Intense]

The past two years trumps the past 50.

Oh, I see the problem here: You're basing your claim on a business cycle fluctuation....

and also forgetting that part of what caused the current mess was the previous widening disparity - the stagnant middle class incomes eroding purchasing power relative to the wealthiest.

What is the length of a typical recession?

No, mess causes the disparity, not the other way around.

You have to look at the Government Employee Raise and Increase in Benefit cycle, compare each increase to the effect on, the extension of the Recession.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Why is it the "wealthys" problem to create jobs? And you don't think the wealthy spend money?

The reason we're given to cut their taxes and coddle them is because they are the job creators! Now you want to let them off the hook for that too?

So, in the end, to combat the deficit the only sacrifices must be made by those least capable of sacrificing. The rich got theirs and should bear no burden.

Great! Sell that in an unemployment line!

Flat tax. Then everyone bleeds the same.

No i am not for letting anyone off the hook for paying their fair share of taxes. But that is just it, a FAIR share. If the government wants a % much from me they better better be taking the same % from all of you. It is NOT fair to take more from some and not others just based on how much they have and or don't have.

To combat the deficit we need to decrease spending. Look closely at what you are saying: The only people who should combat the defect and bear the burden are the "rich" because they can afford it.

A progressive tax is fair. A flat tax would kill people. When people like Forbes campaign for a flat tax I know it would be a poison pill. A trust fund billionaire who says he speaks for 'the people' and has their best interests at heart.

WTF has Forbes ever done for anyone?

 

[Revere]

A tax system where the lower 48% of wage earners pay no Federal income taxes is not "progressive."

 

[Cecilie1200]

Anyone who needs 99 months to find any job is not serious about working.

there are tens of thousands of jobs out there. there are millions of unemployed. while i've not had any issues with unemployment in my life and dont anticipate that i ever will, i can appreciate that the job market is always smaller than the labor market. the job market involves between 50-60% of americans, the rest of us are unemployed by choice or otherwise. there's certainly not enough jobs for us all to snatch up if we all wanted to.

in a shit economy like the one we are in, the job market's capacity shrinks further, and people cant get jobs. i'm generally impressed by americans, but at the same time, some of us are more impressive than others.

is it wise or intelligent to presume as you have, or is there wisdom in recognizing that a shrunken job market will always under-utilize those of us who are least competitive?

If it's so tough to get a job in this economy, how come both my husband and my roommate were able to find brand-new, shiny jobs within two weeks of starting to look?

 

[Big Fitz]

Oh, so you really don't know what happened, your just bullshitting. Got it!!!

Means I haven't done a detailed analysis of each individual steel company. Take your Alinsky perfection tactic and cram it up your ass.

So your fuck up should be mine? Fuck your in the face hoggy, and STFU.

So you have no proof that the EPA regs have been completely harmless to the steel industry? STFU yourself bitch.