Miami, New York City, Los Angeles. The reality is these grand cities symbolize the American Dream around the world, but the day-to-day reality leaves many behind. http://money.cnn.com/2014/12/14/news/economy/america-inequality-10-worst-cities/?npt=NP1 With so many needs americans have, clearly there isn't enough money for "wants" like saving, investing, health insurance. That's why there's such a big wealth inequality...
It depends on what forces acting on the economy are producing the gap. Wouldn't you agree that if corruption, corporatism, exploitation, etc. were creating this gap we should care?
Corruption is highly dubios reason for the descrepency, most likely it is people making money on the market and fluctuating currencies. Its not poor getting poorer, is the rich are getting much much richer. I do not see how this is negative for anyone.
The gap happens because rich will always get richer, its called Compound interest and its a mother (*)(*)(*)(*)er. Poor people do not save/invest and do not get to enjoy the benefits of compound interest. No one is ever going to get rich flipping burgers or putting groceries in bags. So trying to bring income "equality" really just means take money away from the rich.
It is the poor getting poorer. That is a reality validated by solid data. Corruption is not a dubious reason. As a conservative, I'm highly conscious of the fact that politicians are susceptible to corruption via corporatism, and that we have a duty to be vigilant of it.
here's a billionaire, venture capitalist explaining how income disparity is bad for everyone: [video=youtube;bBx2Y5HhplI]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bBx2Y5HhplI[/video] "It is astounding how significantly one idea can shape a society and its policies. Consider this one. If taxes on the rich go up, job creation will go down. This idea is an article of faith for Republicans and seldom challenged by Democrats, and has indeed shaped much of the economic landscape. But sometimes the ideas that we are certain are true, are dead wrong. Consider that, for thousands of years humans believed that the earth was the center of the universe. It’s not, and an astronomer who still believed that it was, would do some pretty terrible astronomy. Likewise, a policy maker who believes that the rich are “job creators”, and therefore should not be taxed, would do equally terrible policy. I have started, or helped start, dozens of companies and initially hired lots of people. But if there was no one around who could afford to buy what we had to sell, all those companies and all those jobs would have evaporated. That’s why I can say with confidence that rich people don’t create jobs, nor do businesses, large or small. Jobs are a consequence of a circle of life-like feedback loop between customers and businesses. And only consumers can set in motion this virtuous cycle of increasing demand and hiring. In this sense, an ordinary consumer is more of a job creator than a capitalist like me. That’s why when business people take credit for creating jobs, it’s a little bit like squirrels taking credit for creating evolution. It’s actually the other way around. Anyone who’s ever run a business knows that hiring more people is a course of last resort for capitalists. It’s what we do if, and only if, rising customer demand requires it. And in this sense, calling yourselves job creators isn’t just inaccurate, it’s disingenuous. That’s why our existing policies are so upside down. When the biggest tax exemptions and the lowest rates benefit the richest, all in the name of job creation, all that happens is that the rich get richer. Since 1980, the share of income for the top 1% of Americans has more than tripled, while our effective tax rates have gone down by 50%. If it was true that lower taxes for the rich and more wealth for the wealthy led to job creation, today we would be drowning in jobs. And yet, unemployment and under-employment is at record highs. Another reason that this idea is so wrong-headed is that, there can never be enough super-rich people to power a great economy. Somebody like me makes hundreds or thousands as times much as the median American, but I don’t buy hundreds or thousands of times as much stuff. My family owns three cars, not 3,000. I buy a few pairs of pants and shirts a year like most American men. Occasionally we go out to eat with friends. I can’t buy enough of anything to make up for the fact that millions of unemployed and under-employed Americans can’t buy any new cars, any clothes, or enjoy any meals out. Nor can I make up for the falling consumption of the vast majority of middle-class families that are barely squeaking by, buried by spiraling costs and trapped by stagnant or declining wages. Here’s an incredible fact… that if the typical American family still retained the same share of income that they did in 1970, they’d earn like $45,000 more a year. Imagine what our economy would be like if that were the case. Significant privileges have come to people like me, capitalists, for being perceived as “job creators” at the center of the economic universe; and the language and metaphors we use to defend the current economic and social arrangements is telling. It’s a small jump from “job creator” to “The Creator”. This language obviously wasn’t chosen by accident. And it’s only honest to admit that when somebody like me calls themselves a “job creator”, we’re not just describing how the economy works, but more particularly, we’re making a claim on status and privileges that we deserve. Speaking of special privileges, the extraordinary differential between the 15% tax rate that capitalists pay on carried interest, dividends and capital gains — and the 35% top marginal rate on work that ordinary Americans pay — it’s kind of hard to justify without a touch of deification We’ve had it backwards for the last 30 years. Rich people like me don’t create jobs, jobs are a consequence of an eco-systemic feedback loop between customers and businesses. And when the middle-class thrives, businesses grow and hire — and owners profit. That’s why taxing the rich to pay for investments that benefit all, is such a fantastic deal for the middle-class and the rich. So ladies and gentleman, here’s an idea worth spreading… In a capitalist economy, the true job creators are middle-class consumers. And taxing the rich to make investments will make the middle-class grow and thrive. It’s the single shrewdest thing we can do for the middle-class, for the poor, and for the rich." http://lybio.net/nick-hanauer-ted-talks-the-inequality-speech/people/
We all know that the federal reserve printing money that goes straight into the stoke market is creating the widening gap. 0bama knows that printing money will help the fat cat dem contributors and when super inflation hits it will hit the middle class the hardest. Explain the injustices that you see in the economy?? Having to work hard and make good decisions? \
Printing money isn't the only problem, but I agree it can't be good in the long run. We can't blame laziness and poor decisions ENTIRELY for the gap. Cultural changes have to be made, but we shouldn't ignore corruption and corporatism because we're so ideologically tied down or bogged down in the personal responsibility discussion. I still believe in the productivity of Americans incentivized by a better quality of life.
the koch brothers, through alec, americans for prosperity, the tea party et al, are working to reduce worker's pay, defund education, make taxes more regressive, suppress voting rights and the list goes on all of the assertions i just made are well documented here: [video=youtube;5Hmhdv_OSvA]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Hmhdv_OSvA[/video]
When you compare the low income with the high income it's apples and oranges. The high income is set by the market and the low income is set by the government. When the government gets your trapped on welfare you are guaranteed a miserable lifetime of poverty for you and your children.
Moyers is one of my all time favorite libs. I'll watch it, but keeping in mind the source, I know it has a liberal bias. That's ok. I don't avoid listening to people like him. You can learn a lot from honest liberals. Dishonest liberals, not so much.
really, you don't know about alec? "The American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) is a nonprofit organization of conservative state legislators and private sector representatives that drafts and shares model state-level legislation for distribution among state governments in the United States." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Legislative_Exchange_Council
I don't have a problem with such organizations. If this is how people want to spend their money, there's no better place than a democratic and free society. Where I draw the line is when the law is broken. Now, what liberals want to do is make these types of organizations illegal, or make it more difficult for them to operate with new laws, not in response to current laws being broken.
I've been saying the same damned thing. Jobs aren't created with tax cuts. Jobs are created by empowering a consumer base to do just that - CONSUME. With consumption comes demand, with demand comes increased production and with increased production comes jobs. You don't simply throw cash at business owners and say they will hire people. It's idiotic nonsense and it has to stop NOW.
The Big Injustice associated with income is taking money from those who earned it, and giving it to those that did not.
15 minutes into it and it's the usual liberal jealousy. The size and scope of ALEC is the problem? Really? That's called effective organizing. Maybe those college classes on non-violent, diversified, community organizing aren't as effective. Sorry.
Who told you that wealth was supposed to be equal? Who explained that one person's wealth earning depends on another's wealth loss? Where was it ever stated that this country is based on a foundation of wealth equality? All lies.
Of other interesting note. The places with the highest wealth gap just happen (no, not just happen) to be progressive hot beds, with political motivations and policies which desire "wealth equality". Ironic? I don't think so. The progressive left is subjecting itself and its policy to a format of wealth inequality by the way of its own agenda. Sadly, they are too oblivious to see it. So they double down on more of the same, trying to fix problems that their own agenda has caused. There is a reason why the left's movement always includes class and race warfare in their partisan causes. It isn't to serve the progressive army, its so the progressive army serves their political ambitions. - - - Updated - - - Corruption - Yes Exploitation - Yes Corporatism - No. - - - Updated - - - Because in zero sum economics, a corner stone of the progressive movement, one person getting rich must mean that another person got poorer. That simply isn't the case.
