Income Inequality in America (2019)

Judge Ito gave me a yangban's farm in the Korea. I say, what? Because, you had to read all the junk on Sa-I-Gu.
https://stephaniedrenka.com/sa-i-gu/
I say, well I guess that makes sense.

 

Comparing owning a human to owning land is retarded.
You do not, have never had and will never have a right to property someone else owns.

 

Noted.

Now you note this: I am living in a political entity of more than 500 million people. That is, significantly larger than the US.

This community - known as the European Union - has developed laws significantly different in key areas than the US. Foremost of which, the two most important debt-generators in a country - which are Health Care and Tertiary Education - are run by state. And, in general, they are much, much, much, much ... much cheaper than in the US.

The EU first and foremost calls itself a "Social Democracy". Now, before anybody goes off the deep-end - because in America the word social is typically employed as a "Church Social", I suggest that you read this essay (from Britannica) that explains how the concept of a Social Democracy was founded in the 19th century. I can assure you that the people who live here in Europe are really not that very different from us Yanks. They want pretty much the same things - and other historic elements they have taken them further.

Meaning that they have elected for key elements of a "Social Democracy", namely low-cost National Healthcare and Tertiary Education both subventioned by governments. And all citizens of the EU have a right to both. What does this mean? In terms of comparative costs, this:


Which means what? This: In the US, you are living on the Red Line above and here in Europe I am on the Blue Line in France. In the US, the comparative cost is twice that of Europe. And, also, the healthcare service is not noticeably different between the two countries, with the sole exception of cost per capita ... !

And the sole-reason for such a drastic difference in cost is comparative salary costs. For instance in the US, a GP earns around $200K annually, whilst in Europe the cost is around $90K ...

 

If ignorance were bliss, some people would already be in heaven ...

 

Ignorance of envy is bliss. I know it not. I will not condemn you for giving into a temptation that I have been spared.

I am, at this moment, overwhelmed with gratitude for the fact that I don't care at all how much more money someone else has. I sincerely don't think that I could care any less; and yes, that is bliss.

 

Nope. That's why public debates go back in the history of mankind a long, long, time ...

Yes, that is self-evident from what you write.

Unfortunately, it is contrary to our very-existence. We-the-sheeple have banded together in a common existence since the dawn of time. Both for protection, but also for the mutual benefit of a market-economy.

There is no escaping the fact that we create common-laws and they influence the way we live. And the lack of some common-laws are injurious to a great percentage of our Total Community. And that is true for any developed country on earth.

Meaning what? Meaning that in terms of human-development we are not as evolved as we would like to think we are - which is why economists developed statistics (foremost of which is that calculating "'GDP" and how it both grows - or not - as is shared.) I am amused by the programs on French TV of those Americans who high-tail it to Alaska to go live in the wilderness. They remind me of societal misfits who simply could not cope being "part of a common existence".

It was too much for them, so off they went. For the most part, we humans share a common-existence on earth. We benefit from that commonality - it feeds us and allows us to live-a-life successfully.

Unfortunately for some far, far better than others. That dystopia between those who have too much and other too little - wherever it may exist - is the real challenge of any modern society today. And the US by numerous econometric values is the formal proof of it ...

 

That above in red is a given since a long, long time in the history of mankind's evolution. You are looking at life through a very special pair of mental-glasses.

And it is a fact-of-life that we cannot possibly avoid ... we are all sharing the same pot-of-existence on this planet ...

 

Yes, which is why I replied with "Ignorance is bliss ..."

Get it? Never mind. M r a.

 

The world has been good to this high school drop out.

Retired from my first career at 39, and have run two businesses since.

Any person with average abilities can get ahead in USA if they equal their efforts to their desires. Too many people go about things with a defeated attitude and think that the man is always stacking the deck against them, and the OP is one of those.

 

UNIFORMED!

Not everybody is born into that very same context. (Especially if you are "coloured" in any northern American state! See those numbers here:

(Click on image to enlarge it.)

We are all citizens of the same country! ALL OF US! We therefore deserve treatment according to our condition. That is, Not All Equal but All treated Equitably.

And that rule would work JUST FINE for those who are caught in abject poverty through no fault of their own - they were BORN into it.

The above comment shows, like sooooo many, that you are very uninformed about what is happening at the lower-end of family incomes.

Which is why I am on this debate-forum.

BFD! And, so what! We all deserve a bit of self-pride, especially if we have worked hard to earn it. How PROUD, however, you seem to be for yourself! Lucky guy that you are because the stats tell a different story!

It is apparent that your personal-context is within a circumference of "Me, Myself and I" - all three!

Somehow you think that the reason you are beyond-the-norm financially is due to "hard work" by which you succeeded. And evidence shows that you have every reason to be proud of your success. But YOU are just one pea-in-the-pod of 345 million people.

More importantly, you think that if anyone follows your example then they too can "do well". And, GOOD FOR YOU! But WRONG for those American men, women and children living today below the Poverty Threshold!

How many fellow-Americans might that be? Have a look here:

Note that since the mid-1970s, the Poverty Rate has oscillated between 12 and 15% of the population. That's more than 40 years that we, as a nation, have made NO EFFORT WHATSOEVER (across both Dem and Replicant administrations) to take this "bull" by the horns. Meaning find a way such that it hovers around 5%.

And note that below "50% of the Poverty Level" means that half of that 12/15% are living on half the Poverty Threshold income-level of $25K for a family of four.

Allow me to do the maths for you: That makes for around $13K or barely 1000 a month of gross income!

And the above happens because, in fact, the stats show that one is born into poverty far more so than "one falls into poverty". (Of which plenty of us did during the Great Recession - brought about by financial wickedness in a realty-finance business with far too little government oversight!)

I rest my case ...

 

I am from a very low end family off the streets of Roxbury/Boston. I know what poverty is. I was as poor as any of my black friends.

And, all your pretty graphs for forget to mention that poverty is not a static condition for people born into poverty.

Blacks? There is a huge cultural and environmental difference between blacks and other races when It comes down to breaking out of poverty. Exposure to successful people has been limited in the past for the black youth in America, but it is beginning to be less so every year. Inner cities are finally waking up to teaching the fundamentals of filling the skill gaps that many black youth have had to deal with.

Any person can get ahead in this country no matter what color you are, and this systematic racism BS you are spewing out is poppycock. Businesses love making money, and will take in the person that can help them make money regardless of a person's color. Is there racism out there..........yep! But not on the level that you and your ilk like to propose.

Pure defeatist attitude along with a racist outlook on your part ................by the low expectations of people of color.

People like you are more of a problem.

 

ALTOGETHER HELLISH

Yes, I know. But it is the ONLY real-evidence going. Believe me, I know how to find bonafide research regarding subjects of many kinds - IF IT EXISTS ON THE WEB.

If anyone wants to stay ignorant then of-course such is their choice. But if one want's to DEBATE, they had better have the facts. Or, they should go to a Message Board to shake the dust outta-their-brain.

But no-one can be expect me to respect that latter-choice in a Debate Forum. After all, this is a Debate Forum, and neither a Message Board nor a local bar. We are here to discuss/debate well-founded opinions, and the best way to accomplish that is to verifiably provide the evidence of what we argue. Get it?

From here, a key-caveat about the Poverty Threshold:

You have brought up an important point, which I (even me!) disregarded. And it is the question: "Just who is living within below the Poverty Line (or Threshold)". And that answer is (as best as I can find) here: Poverty Threshold - United states and I will not show the detail. If interested just-read-it!

EXCEPT THIS ONE! There is one item on the list given that comes close to answering your question. Here it is - warts-'n-all:

Ten years goes by in a flash. It is only one-eighth of our total life-span. (Which is 79 at present.) Or, in adulthood, one-sixth. Nonetheless, no one should enter that sort of existence and be obliged to stay there for ten-years. That experience will likely ruin their mentality (and thus their ability to self-sustain or cope) for the rest of their lives.

MY POINT FINALLY

The above clarification (from the Web-site) I interpret to mean that below the Poverty Threshold is likely not a permanent affair for most people. But, then, I will wait on that one until a more profound lifespan-study of those who do go-in and get-out is available*.

What I am trying to say is that - regardless of the total time one spends below the Poverty Threshold - we should find ways to reduce the population from 15% below the Poverty Threshold to 5% ...

*And I am not expecting one anytime soon to create it. Getting that data together is likely altogether hellish - given the time span involved.

 

It would be a very hard goal to obtain....5%

Some people are just as happy sitting around doing nothing, while others just want to blame everyone but themselves for their predicament. There will always be that percentage that you cannot motivate.

I'm not knocking all poor people,obviously.

 

Wrong. When we examine where the incomes of the poor actually go, it is overwhelmingly to the rich, and it is overwhelmingly by dint of privileges such as land titles, bank licenses and IP monopolies -- i.e., by taking, not making. We do not find any such relationship with food.

 

You are just makin' $#!+ up again. I didn't mention land. You said property. You said that slavery is rightful because slaves' rights to liberty are the property of their owners, and no one ever has a right to any property anyone else owns. Here, you even say it again:

See? You just said that slaves have no right to liberty because their rights to liberty are property owned by someone else. You are literally saying that chattel slavery is rightful.

 

Comparing owning land to owning a human is retarded. No matter how many times you insist otherwise, reality will always be here. You do not, and never had, a right to anyone else’s property.

 

You are just makin' $#!+ up again. I didn't mention land. You said property. You said that slavery is rightful because slaves' rights to liberty are the property of their owners, and no one ever has a right to any property anyone else owns. Here, you even say it again:

See? You just said that slaves have no right to liberty because their rights to liberty are property owned by someone else. You are literally saying that chattel slavery is rightful because property rights have unconditional priority over individual rights to life and liberty.

Right. And reality is that the landowner owns everyone else's liberty right to use that land.

 

Making things up and pretending I said them is as retarded as you comparing owning a human to owning land.

at no point have you ever had a right to property you don’t own. If you try and take property you don’t own, you will be swiftly and easily stopped.