Income inequality Bi-partisan CBO Report

Because I have yet to see any jobs created by the poor. Take the rich chance takers out of the equation and we are truly (*)(*)(*)(*)ed

 

TWO WORDS: talk radio.

TWO MORE WORDS: Fox News.

 

What upward mobility? Have you asked Americans about this.

 

Here is the evidence:

 

Duh, yeah. The purchasing power has lessen for those 2 groups. When one group rising faster, other groups are not doing as well. Economic 101.

 

Did you see that here? Most of us talking about income inequality are talking about at least 80% of Americans. It is true that 80% are poorer today than 30 years ago.

 

I'd suggest working harder and smarter for those that feel despaired. Keep the government out of it

 

What if part of the solution is not a (third world) work ethic, but about "free-riding" on (first world) privileges and immunities already established by Persons of wealth in our republic, who may be citizens in the several States.

Corporate welfare has even paid multimillion dollar bonuses to civil Persons in our republic, who were nowhere near the poverty threshold for real persons in our political-economy.

 

The government gives "corporate welfare" so corporations can hire people who will receive paychecks the government can tax.

So get a job, so you can pay your taxes, and become part of the solution, instead of demanding handouts.

Tell obama to do what he promised and get rid of NAFTA, and China's favorite nation trade status.

 

So what, (under Any form of Capitalism). All it takes is money to hire people.

What if part of the solution is not a (third world) work ethic, but about "free-riding" on (first world) privileges and immunities already established by Persons of wealth in our republic, who may be citizens in the several States.

Corporate welfare has even paid multimillion dollar bonuses to civil Persons in our republic, who were nowhere near the poverty threshold for real persons in our political-economy.

You didn't seem to have a problem when CEOs were asking for corporate welfare that included multimillion dollar bonuses to civil Persons and citizens in the several States in our republic.

 

Corporations exist to make money. Theyre not a welfare institution.

 

So, what? If they ask for corporate welfare they become a welfare Institution instead of merely disbanding their operation and trying better next time.

 

Then if that's the case, they need to use a term other than "income Inequality", as my comment was accurate to that. "income Inequality" Is certainly about what your job is, hence it was no red herring. It's in the thread title.

 

There is a correlation between income and IQ. On global scale google "IQ and Wealth of Nations."

 

This is one of the reasons that some of us want a smaller, less powerful, and less intrusive federal government. If politicians in Washington had less power and less influence over the lives of Americans then big corporate interest would have little desire to spend all their time and money trying to influence them. It would be a waste of time because they have little ability to help them.

If you own a business, and I as a consultant informed you that if you just spend some time and money influencing your congressman, you can get him to pass a law or regulation that prevents others from competing with you, you will probably take that action.

If you own a business, and I as a consultant told you that spending time and money trying to influence your congressman to help your business was a waste of time, because he is powerless to influence the outcomes of private business, you would not take that action.

This is an easier solution than trying to convince human beings to not try and gain advantages over others.

 

Income distribution works for me if it is not about class warfare.

- - - Updated - - -

Why do you believe that, with the abandoning of commodities as forms of money?

 

Sorry, you asked for proof. I gave it to you. The subject has nothing to do with working harder or smarter. It is about the money mainly going to the top. But I will agree that the government under Reagan and the 2 Bushes did help the 1% get that money.

When are you going to stop defending the current system and recognize that you are one of the ones getting screwed?

 

Say what??? Income inequality is about the gap widening at every income level and especially in comparison to the top 1% who you keep defending. Back before 1978, the 1% earned 26.5 times the average worker. Today they earn 209.6 times the average worker. And everyone of us is losing purchasing power ground to the 1%.

 

Now anywhere in your spiel, did you mention anything about workers' wages. You want to have a less influential government to save businesses money. Now what part of that solves the income inequality issue. Nothing. You want to save money for the 1% . Are you part of the 1%?

 

sounds like it's the corps getting something for nothing to me... time to share the wealth with their employees

 

It is really that simple. It is not about IQs, drive or laziness, getting more education, social/corporate welfare, or working 2 jobs. It is just about sharing the wealth.

 

>>MOD EDIT: INSULT<<< Our nation and it's wealthy are hugely philanthropic to people in need, but the liberals that hate capitalism can't point to one single society that has had a better system than ours.

 

I would agree with you, but illegals with a third world work ethic work harder than you. So, how does your line of reasoning account for that?

 

they work just as hard, they are just paid a lot lot less, if the cost was the same, employers would not go through the hassle of hiring foreign workers

 

Ok, the rich are getting richer, that's nothing new and I believe the entire world operates the same way. But since you seen to think it's a problem, what would you like to see happen to solve it?