Inequalities in wealth haven't exploded.

[Jhhnn]

You can have a lot of mobility but it's driven in large part by chance what good is it?

It's better than no chance at all, which is what the Plutocracy intends to leave for the rest of us...

 

[glenn1]

Yes, it has, as the many, many charts and other information posted show.

Who fucking cares? Every quintile is doing better, but those on the left always behave like crabs in a pot. Clue for you guys, a lot of typical voters may envy the rich and even be okay with having their taxes raised, but we know damn well if it happened you'd tax the rest of us also. Plus, you progressives would only squander it away on welfare boondoggles, kickbacks to organized labor, and high-speed rail connecting California towns of a couple hundred people. Your agenda has pretty much nothing to offer the typical middle class voter.

 

[Jhhnn]

Who fucking cares? Every quintile is doing better, but those on the left always behave like crabs in a pot. Clue for you guys, a lot of typical voters may envy the rich and even be okay with having their taxes raised, but we know damn well if it happened you'd tax the rest of us also. Plus, you progressives would only squander it away on welfare boondoggles, kickbacks to organized labor, and high-speed rail connecting California towns of a couple hundred people. Your agenda has pretty much nothing to offer the typical middle class voter.

For a second there, I thought you were referring to Repubs holding unemployment benefits & food stamps hostage to fat cat tax cut extensions...

My mistake.

 

[glenn1]

For a second there, I thought you were referring to Repubs holding unemployment benefits & food stamps hostage to fat cat tax cut extensions...

My mistake.

While I agree this is stupid and petty of the GOP, I daresay the biggest concern of the average middle class person isn't whether the unemployed get 99 weeks of payments.

 

[Throckmorton]

While I agree this is stupid and petty of the GOP, I daresay the biggest concern of the average middle class person isn't whether the unemployed get 99 weeks of payments.

In this day and age the average "middle class" person probably has been unemployed for 99 weeks.

I put "middle class" in quotes because the "middle class" is POOR now.

 

[JSt0rm]

so it shows a trend that the 1% was rising even before the recession really hit.

we all know the rich get even richer during recessions, thats common knowledge.

Of course you dumb fuck. Nobody thought the wealthy rise was because of the recession.

 

[Engineer]

Who fucking cares? Every quintile is doing better,

Am I reading the graphs on the previous page wrong?

Seems to me from what I've read that pretty much everyone is going backwards and most for over a decade (especially the last 12 years or so)?

 

[glenn1]

In this day and age the average "middle class" person probably has been unemployed for 99 weeks.

I put "middle class" in quotes because the "middle class" is POOR now.

The average middle class person is employed.

 

[glenn1]

Am I reading the graphs on the previous page wrong?

Seems to me from what I've read that pretty much everyone is going backwards and most for over a decade (especially the last 12 years or so)?

See the post from Demo24.

CBO finds that, between 1979 and 2007, income grew by:
275 percent for the top 1 percent of households,
65 percent for the next 19 percent,
Just under 40 percent for the next 60 percent, and
18 percent for the bottom 20 percent.

 

[Throckmorton]

The average middle class person is employed.

Good point, once you lose your job you're not middle class anymore.

 

[Engineer]

See the post from Demo24.

Thanks. Was just looking at graphs.

For the 30 year period, I don't doubt that. For the last decade, I don't see the same trend.

 

[Doppel]

Based on the 170,000+ number, people over 65 really don't have much. Not prepared at all. Better hope SS doesn't go bust too soon.

Yeah, they're pretty screwed, especially since the kids they're passing the world over to are already up to their eyeballs in debt and competing in a tougher employment market than they ever had to.

There are quite a few athletes <snip>

I think you're probably a lot better at statistics than you are letting on. These people are statistically irrelevant outliers, just like people who's retirement plan is to buy lottery tickets and once in a blue moon somebody actually cashes out.

 

[Engineer]

Yeah, they're pretty screwed, especially since the kids they're passing the world over to are already up to their eyeballs in debt and competing in a tougher employment market than they ever had to.I think

I just read the article that you posted and those numbers include home equity. If half the people over 65 are worth less than $170,000 including home equity....it's worse than I thought.

 

[Doppel]

A huge number of "established" adults have little to no retirement fund at all. They live basically pay check to pay check until they retire, and the only reason they have equity in the home is because it's kind of a forced savings plan.

 

[Engineer]

A huge number of "established" adults have little to no retirement fund at all. They live basically pay check to pay check until they retire, and the only reason they have equity in the home is because it's kind of a forced savings plan.

Looking at the 35 and under crowd, they're not off to a good start either. Looks rather "bleak" for those that dream that the "average" person can save for their own retirement.

 

[Craig234]

Who fucking cares? Every quintile is doing better, but those on the left always behave like crabs in a pot. Clue for you guys, a lot of typical voters may envy the rich and even be okay with having their taxes raised, but we know damn well if it happened you'd tax the rest of us also. Plus, you progressives would only squander it away on welfare boondoggles, kickbacks to organized labor, and high-speed rail connecting California towns of a couple hundred people. Your agenda has pretty much nothing to offer the typical middle class voter.

You get an irony of the MONTH for applying the crab in the pot, which so well describes the right, to the left, who is the alternative who cooperate to help each other.

You're just an idiot here, misrepresenting the left as the basis of your position - because the left argues nearly the opposite of what you say, you just say they're lying.

You lie about the tax agenda, and you lie about the spending agenda. That's the basis of your 'position' - straw men, lies about the left.

Well, you righties really only want to restore slavery but this time for all races, and to put every firstborn of the 99% into labor camps with 24 hour right-wing talk radio indoctrination, and to make the minimum wage 1 penny an hour. You want a negative income tax on the top 1%. Hey, how useful it is to lie about the other side and then call that arguing for your side.

The progressive agenda is the only one for the middle class, despite your lies about what that agenda is and who it benefits. Your post is nothing but dishonest crap.

 

[Phokus]

Who fucking cares? Every quintile is doing better, but those on the left always behave like crabs in a pot. Clue for you guys, a lot of typical voters may envy the rich and even be okay with having their taxes raised, but we know damn well if it happened you'd tax the rest of us also. Plus, you progressives would only squander it away on welfare boondoggles, kickbacks to organized labor, and high-speed rail connecting California towns of a couple hundred people. Your agenda has pretty much nothing to offer the typical middle class voter.

Sorry, but you're completely wrong about this. It's the left that has called on middle class taxes to be cut. Notice several of the GOP presidential candidates have EXPLICITLY called for taxes on the middle class and working class to be raised.

When Obamas and McCain's competing tax cut plans were presented back in '08, it was Obama who gave the biggest tax cuts to the middle class, while McCain focused on giving the rich the biggest cuts while giving crumbs to the middle class.

The GOP messaging machine is really powerful if people really think what you wrote.

 

[woolfe9999]

Sorry, but you're completely wrong about this. It's the left that has called on middle class taxes to be cut. Notice several of the GOP presidential candidates have EXPLICITLY called for taxes on the middle class and working class to be raised.

When Obamas and McCain's competing tax cut plans were presented back in '08, it was Obama who gave the biggest tax cuts to the middle class, while McCain focused on giving the rich the biggest cuts while giving crumbs to the middle class.

I'll add to this the GOP's recent opposition to a temporary cut in payroll taxes.

 

[OneOfTheseDays]

The GOP has become more blatant in the fact that it only serves to cater to the rich. You really cannot dispute otherwise looking at the facts. They simply don't bear out any of glenn's ridiculous assertions.

The reality is the rich were doing just fine when income tax rights were higher under Clinton, Bush, Reagan, etc. Nobody was complaining about tax rates being too high and wealthy people and corporations didn't leave this country in droves. That's because at a certain level of wealth, a few percentage points increase in tax rates is literally a drop in the bucket that doesn't affect lifestyle. If we're going to increase taxes as part of the solution to our deficit problems it must be the wealthiest 1&#37; that give. They've had it REAL good over the last 30 years, it's time for them to bear some of this economic burden.

 

[Anarchist420]

My take on wealth inequality: If the government is doing it, then it's not fine. If the government is not doing it, then wealth inequalities are fine. That and the fact that quality of life has improved for the vast majority are 2 additional big points of what I linked in my original post. Economic mobility would've been a lot higher (i.e., the rich woud've become poorer) had it not been for the bailouts.

IIRC, my dad used to be in the highest tax bracket (during the Clinton years), but we were never rich and he worked pretty hard. I do believe that taxes are too high on the middle class, but also on corporations who pay them. Microsoft, for example, gives 26% of their profits to the government.

 

[woolfe9999]

IIRC, my dad used to be in the highest tax bracket (during the Clinton years), but we were never rich and he worked pretty hard. I do believe that taxes are too high on the middle class, but also on corporations who pay them. Microsoft, for example, gives 26% of their profits to the government.

http://www.businesspundit.com/25-corporations-that-pay-less-taxes-than-you-do/

Remember that the going rate for the corporate tax rate is 35%. But even since the halcyon days when Gates was in charge, his baby has paid maybe 5-10% in taxes.

 

[OneOfTheseDays]

My take on wealth inequality: If the government is doing it, then it's not fine. If the government is not doing it, then wealth inequalities are fine. That and the fact that quality of life has improved for the vast majority are 2 additional big points of what I linked in my original post. Economic mobility would've been a lot higher (i.e., the rich woud've become poorer) had it not been for the bailouts.

IIRC, my dad used to be in the highest tax bracket (during the Clinton years), but we were never rich and he worked pretty hard. I do believe that taxes are too high on the middle class, but also on corporations who pay them. Microsoft, for example, gives 26% of their profits to the government.

The majority of corporations in the United States pay very little taxes at all due to the excessive loopholes that exist in our tax code today. You simply have no idea what you're talking about.

 

[Craig234]

The majority of corporations in the United States pay very little taxes at all due to the excessive loopholes that exist in our tax code today. You simply have no idea what you're talking about.

But his ideology is exposed. Nowhere in his list is the government preventing excessive inequality, and he support it if it's not the government implementing it. It's nuts.

He has no clue why excessive inequality is bad - only a blind ideology against 'the government'.

He only cares that his ideological nemesis - democracy - is opposed.

 

[Engineer]

A huge number of "established" adults have little to no retirement fund at all. They live basically pay check to pay check until they retire, and the only reason they have equity in the home is because it's kind of a forced savings plan.

Just in time to reply to this....


Retirement crisis looms for retiring baby boomers...

 

[HomerJS]

I hope people understand that most of the difference is due to housing bubbles.

The 1% seperation started in 1979 well before the housing bubble. HB did exaserbate the situation