Obama Administration = Most successful at reducing income inequality in 50 years

[glenn1]

That's just more of the same dodge, the same effort to avoid the central issue. If you think that tax policy should enable insane greed at the top & even greater inequality, just say so. Just tell us how smart Trump & others like him are for ruthlessly exploiting current policy & how we should keep it that way because Freedumb! or some such.

Thanks for so perfectly demonstrating the difference in your worldview and mine. You look at tax policy as a weapon to wield against people you dislike because they're more successful than you, "if only I could stick him with a big tax bill that would cut him down to size and maybe I'll get some extra social welfare bucks to boot." Whereas for me tax policy is a means of fairly and equally distributing the expenses of maintaining and improving common good spending that benefits us all equally; if we need $100B to improve infrastructure (arbitrary number for sake of discussion) that everyone uses then everyone should have their taxes increased by x% to pay for it.

 

[jackstar7]

Glenn has gone fully disingenuous.

In fairness, it isn't much of a change.

 

[JSt0rm]

Taxing rich people is how real trickle down works. They just tricked all u dummy's that it was the oppposite.

 

[glenn1]

Glenn has gone fully disingenuous.

In fairness, it isn't much of a change.

It's exactly the opposite of "disingenuous" to directly reject the idea that taxation is about "inequality" or "greed" or anything other than revenue generation for the federal government.

 

[bshole]

Thanks for so perfectly demonstrating the difference in your worldview and mine. You look at tax policy as a weapon to wield against people you dislike because they're more successful than you, "if only I could stick him with a big tax bill that would cut him down to size and maybe I'll get some extra social welfare bucks to boot." Whereas for me tax policy is a means of fairly and equally distributing the expenses of maintaining and improving common good spending that benefits us all equally; if we need $100B to improve infrastructure (arbitrary number for sake of discussion) that everyone uses then everyone should have their taxes increased by x% to pay for it.

Damn straight. The people whose boots you to kiss and shine have corrupted the entire American body politic and are fighting an active war on the middle and working classes. They have largely won. There is no real middle class any longer. We have the carcass of a middle class..... a middle class that is poorer than the working class of the 60s.

 

[glenn1]

Damn straight. The people whose boots you to kiss and shine have corrupted the entire American body politic and are fighting an active war on the middle and working classes. They have largely won. There is no real middle class any longer. We have the carcass of a middle class..... a middle class that is poorer than the working class of the 60s.

I find it ironic (and not in the intended, hipster appreciated sense of ironic) that the progressive left spends their time nowadays pining away for the era where people lived in 700 square foot houses, immigration was tightly enforced and limited to mostly western Europeans, women were expected to be housewives and exposed to constant sexual harassment when they did work, negroes knew their place and that was the back of the bus, and the rest world outside the First World was expected to starve quietly while Americans complained about their shitty factory jobs in the textile mills and paid their union dues to corrupt bosses like Jimmy Hoffa.

 

[bshole]

I find it ironic (and not in the intended, hipster appreciated sense of ironic) that the progressive left spends their time nowadays pining away for the era where people lived in 700 square foot houses, immigration was tightly enforced and limited to mostly western Europeans, women were expected to be housewives and exposed to constant sexual harassment when they did work, negroes knew their place and that was the back of the bus, and the rest world outside the First World was expected to starve quietly while Americans complained about their shitty factory jobs in the textile mills and paid their union dues to corrupt bosses like Jimmy Hoffa.

What we pine for is a time when the workers had an equal slice of their own productivity. The people you are in love with were able to disconnect their workers from the fruits of their own increased productivity by corrupting the political system with their filthy money.

I think the people pining for all those other things that liberals were able to dismantle (racism/sexism/homophobia) are all fundamentalist Christians. They want the moral evils back but not the moral goods.

 

[jackstar7]

It's exactly the opposite of "disingenuous" to directly reject the idea that taxation is about "inequality" or "greed" or anything other than revenue generation for the federal government.

The government, in service of the society for which it operates... yeah, nevermind.

 

[Jhhnn]

It's exactly the opposite of "disingenuous" to directly reject the idea that taxation is about "inequality" or "greed" or anything other than revenue generation for the federal government.

So.. Libertopia, right?

We, as a people, have the right to direct the structure of our society. When free market trickle down economic in a deregulated environment of multinational capitalism fails to deliver, we have the right to choose other means. We have the right & the obligation to see to the general welfare even when an insurgent plutocracy sees it otherwise. The rights of property & ownership do not transcend the State but rather depend upon it.

 

[glenn1]

What we pine for is a time when the workers had an equal slice of their own productivity. The people you are in love with were able to disconnect their workers from the fruits of their own increased productivity by corrupting the political system with their filthy money.

I think the people pining for all those other things that liberals were able to dismantle (racism/sexism/homophobia) are all fundamentalist Christians. They want the moral evils back but not the moral goods.

Your first statement is not only wrong but naive. American workers enjoyed an oversize slice of their productivity due to economic barriers to low competition from labor in other countries due to wars, lack of capital investment, education, warfare, etc. and once those conditions eased you saw the price premium for American workers disappear. That's because the American worker didn't offer any special differentiating skill from the worker from China, India, Ecuador, et cetera. So now you're continuing to see wages normalize - formerly underpaid and underutilized labor from non U.S. and European nations has enjoyed increased wages while Americans have seen theirs decline due to the increased competition. Absent trying to keep 3rd world persons living in abject poverty for all eternity there is literally no way the U.S. would continue to enjoy the economic conditions of the post WW2 boom. Labor got a one-time bump that isn't going to repeat itself and isn't going to be restored no matter what you do with tax policy.

 

[agent00f]

Your first statement is not only wrong but naive. American workers enjoyed an oversize slice of their productivity due to economic barriers to low competition from labor in other countries due to wars, lack of capital investment, education, warfare, etc. and once those conditions eased you saw the price premium for American workers disappear. That's because the American worker didn't offer any special differentiating skill from the worker from China, India, Ecuador, et cetera. So now you're continuing to see wages normalize - formerly underpaid and underutilized labor from non U.S. and European nations has enjoyed increased wages while Americans have seen theirs decline due to the increased competition. Absent trying to keep 3rd world persons living in abject poverty for all eternity there is literally no way the U.S. would continue to enjoy the economic conditions of the post WW2 boom. Labor got a one-time bump that isn't going to repeat itself and isn't going to be restored no matter what you do with tax policy.

He's more complaining about what capitalism looks like.

Ironically much of that post-war bump was due to the government forcing people into more productive jobs.

 

[bshole]

Your first statement is not only wrong but naive. American workers enjoyed an oversize slice of their productivity due to economic barriers to low competition from labor in other countries due to wars, lack of capital investment, education, warfare, etc. and once those conditions eased you saw the price premium for American workers disappear. That's because the American worker didn't offer any special differentiating skill from the worker from China, India, Ecuador, et cetera. So now you're continuing to see wages normalize - formerly underpaid and underutilized labor from non U.S. and European nations has enjoyed increased wages while Americans have seen theirs decline due to the increased competition. Absent trying to keep 3rd world persons living in abject poverty for all eternity there is literally no way the U.S. would continue to enjoy the economic conditions of the post WW2 boom. Labor got a one-time bump that isn't going to repeat itself and isn't going to be restored no matter what you do with tax policy.

You do realize that as these other counties gain manufacturing expertise, we are losing ours? That innovation will eventually migrate to those countries? That when America loses this expertise it will become a second tier nation? Exporting manufacturing ALWAYS harms the country doing the exporting. It is a nice long draw of the knife across one's own throat.

.

 

[glenn1]

He's more complaining about what capitalism looks like.

Ironically much of that post-war bump was due to the government forcing people into more productive jobs.

Do tell about that "forcing" unless you're referring to the drawdown of the armed forces after the war concluded. But no one was 'forced' into different jobs, more productive or not. Between demographic changes (baby boom), new economic paradigms (rise of the conglomerate) and emerging technologies (TV, electronics, automation, fertilizers, etc), and varied rebuilding needs (e.g. Marshall plan) there were plenty of factors driving people into more productive work than was the case before the war. The tax rate at the time had pretty much nothing whatsoever to do with it the post WW2 growth environment.

 

[HamburgerBoy]

You really get into a lot of completely pointless side arguments in a lot of threads.

Maybe if you didn't make a lot of hit-and-run threads, you'd be able to control the discussion according to your whims, sweetie.

How are immigration and labor supply (something Jhhnn mentioned related to this thread) a "pointless side argument" to a discussion on wages and income?

 

[glenn1]

You do realize that as these other counties gain manufacturing expertise, we are losing ours? That innovation will eventually migrate to those countries? That when America loses this expertise it will become a second tier nation? Exporting manufacturing ALWAYS harms the country doing the exporting. It is a nice long draw of the knife across one's own throat.

.

No, it means the U.S. and third world will converge as is morally proper to happen. It's not "drawing the knife across one's own throat" to reject trying to keep billions of others in abject poverty so an American worker can enjoy higher wages caused by hindering the ability of others to compete. Hell yeah I want innovation to migrate to other countries because I think it's wrong to condemn them to lives consisting of this:

 

[HamburgerBoy]

my point was japan does not care about infinite growth. Everyone points to them being stagnant like its horrible. Its a fully mature society and everything works in balance.

You managed to completely miss my point and ended up indirectly agreeing with me. Infinite growth isn't a required factor for a sustainable society, I completely agree. However, that doesn't change the reality that countries like Japan are in the middle of a painful transition towards population decline, with more retirees and less new workers with every year. Combined with social programs that disproportionately benefit the elderly, it's a recipe for miserable life prospects. Your argument should be with Jhhnn, who believes that young people are entitled to support his old worthless butt until death according to schemes predicated on infinite population growth.

You do realize that as these other counties gain manufacturing expertise, we are losing ours? That innovation will eventually migrate to those countries? That when America loses this expertise it will become a second tier nation? Exporting manufacturing ALWAYS harms the country doing the exporting. It is a nice long draw of the knife across one's own throat.

.

Do you believe that there will soon be no first-tier nations?

 

[agent00f]

Do tell about that "forcing" unless you're referring to the drawdown of the armed forces after the war concluded. But no one was 'forced' into different jobs, more productive or not. Between demographic changes (baby boom), new economic paradigms (rise of the conglomerate) and emerging technologies (TV, electronics, automation, fertilizers, etc), and varied rebuilding needs (e.g. Marshall plan) there were plenty of factors driving people into more productive work than was the case before the war. The tax rate at the time had pretty much nothing whatsoever to do with it the post WW2 growth environment.

The war greatly industrialized the country and the same people pushed into weapons factories & such, particularly women, continued on in these more productive roles than whatever they were doing back in bumf nowhere. But I don't know what I expected out of you more than pedantry.

 

[agent00f]

You managed to completely miss my point and ended up indirectly agreeing with me. Infinite growth isn't a required factor for a sustainable society, I completely agree. However, that doesn't change the reality that countries like Japan are in the middle of a painful transition towards population decline, with more retirees and less new workers with every year. Combined with social programs that disproportionately benefit the elderly, it's a recipe for miserable life prospects. Your argument should be with Jhhnn, who believes that young people are entitled to support his old worthless butt until death according to schemes predicated on infinite population growth.



Do you believe that there will soon be no first-tier nations?

Nations are competing with each other. Nobody wants to invest in a relative loser. That's how capitalism works.

 

[yllus]

Maybe if you didn't make a lot of hit-and-run threads, you'd be able to control the discussion according to your whims, sweetie.

How are immigration and labor supply (something Jhhnn mentioned related to this thread) a "pointless side argument" to a discussion on wages and income?

I'm not looking to control much, but really, you do tend to get going for multiple posts on really minor or obvious details. Come on up and let's talk big picture!

 

[Enigmoid]

Your first statement is not only wrong but naive. American workers enjoyed an oversize slice of their productivity due to economic barriers to low competition from labor in other countries due to wars, lack of capital investment, education, warfare, etc. and once those conditions eased you saw the price premium for American workers disappear. That's because the American worker didn't offer any special differentiating skill from the worker from China, India, Ecuador, et cetera. So now you're continuing to see wages normalize - formerly underpaid and underutilized labor from non U.S. and European nations has enjoyed increased wages while Americans have seen theirs decline due to the increased competition. Absent trying to keep 3rd world persons living in abject poverty for all eternity there is literally no way the U.S. would continue to enjoy the economic conditions of the post WW2 boom. Labor got a one-time bump that isn't going to repeat itself and isn't going to be restored no matter what you do with tax policy.

This is the "Fixed Pie" Illusion.

By current standards, the US exported very very little to the rest of the world post WW2.

Exports as a percentage of GDP in the 50s and 60s hovered around 5% (and a lot of this is probably to Canada/Europe NOT developing countries). The US and other countries never enjoyed lower barriers to competition in other countries in the past - there never really was any competition with other countries as everything was made domestically for domestic purposes (shipping was a very very real expense). There was no 'taking advantage of workers in other countries" - there simply wasn't very much trading with other countries. Despite this, wages were high.

You are falling into the fixed pie illusion where you view productivity as some sort of global share when in reality in the past, the world was much much less connected than it is today. Globalization is a relatively recent phenomenon and had nothing to do with the 50s and 60s.

 

[MrSquished]

Thanks for so perfectly demonstrating the difference in your worldview and mine. You look at tax policy as a weapon to wield against people you dislike because they're more successful than you, "if only I could stick him with a big tax bill that would cut him down to size and maybe I'll get some extra social welfare bucks to boot." Whereas for me tax policy is a means of fairly and equally distributing the expenses of maintaining and improving common good spending that benefits us all equally; if we need $100B to improve infrastructure (arbitrary number for sake of discussion) that everyone uses then everyone should have their taxes increased by x% to pay for it.

Wanting a progressive tax system does not equal wanting to cut someone down to size. That's a fallacy you just made up. Sure perhaps there are a few angry folks who think that way but that's not the bulk. Under the current plan proposed by the Dems for example, the very wealthy would still say filthy rich and exponentially wealthier than the other 95% of Americans whose taxes would not go up.

 

[agent00f]

This is the "Fixed Pie" Illusion.

By current standards, the US exported very very little to the rest of the world post WW2.

Exports as a percentage of GDP in the 50s and 60s hovered around 5% (and a lot of this is probably to Canada/Europe NOT developing countries). The US and other countries never enjoyed lower barriers to competition in other countries in the past - there never really was any competition with other countries as everything was made domestically for domestic purposes (shipping was a very very real expense). There was no 'taking advantage of workers in other countries" - there simply wasn't very much trading with other countries. Despite this, wages were high.

You are falling into the fixed pie illusion where you view productivity as some sort of global share when in reality in the past, the world was much much less connected than it is today. Globalization is a relatively recent phenomenon and had nothing to do with the 50s and 60s.

His main point was that in the increasingly developed & globalized market much of first world wages simply aren't competitive, which is actually right. We've seen where capitalism leads:

Wanting a progressive tax system does not equal wanting to cut someone down to size. That's a fallacy you just made up. Sure perhaps there are a few angry folks who think that way but that's not the bulk. Under the current plan proposed by the Dems for example, the very wealthy would still say filthy rich and exponentially wealthier than the other 95% of Americans whose taxes would not go up.

And that is the place where progressive (ie robin hood) taxes are necessary to keep the pitchfork crowds away.

 

[JSt0rm]

You managed to completely miss my point and ended up indirectly agreeing with me. Infinite growth isn't a required factor for a sustainable society, I completely agree. However, that doesn't change the reality that countries like Japan are in the middle of a painful transition towards population decline, with more retirees and less new workers with every year. Combined with social programs that disproportionately benefit the elderly, it's a recipe for miserable life prospects. Your argument should be with Jhhnn, who believes that young people are entitled to support his old worthless butt until death according to schemes predicated on infinite population growth.



Do you believe that there will soon be no first-tier nations?

Honestly its great over there. They dont look at everyone around them as a burden and the system works. There is poverty yes but its great in general.

 

[Enigmoid]

His main point was that in the increasingly developed & globalized market much of first world wages simply aren't competitive, which is actually right. We've seen where capitalism leads:

I agree completely with your statement: First world wages are not competitive with those in 3rd world countries in such a globalized world.

My point was that this is due completely to easier trading/reduced barriers. I.e. the reason manufacturing was domestic in the past was because it was flat out unfeasible to produce many products at competitive prices in distant countries - there was no exploitation of the 3rd world as he said; the USA quite frankly didn't really trade at all with the 3rd world.

You can create any internal/domestic manufacturing industry. You just have to impose closed/reduced trade borders. (I.e. Canadian dairy industry).

 

[OverVolt]

Damn straight. The people whose boots you to kiss and shine have corrupted the entire American body politic and are fighting an active war on the middle and working classes. They have largely won. There is no real middle class any longer. We have the carcass of a middle class..... a middle class that is poorer than the working class of the 60s.

Yea so? Got what you voted for. It has alot to do with power. The middle class voluntarily gave up their power. They cheered on the destruction of unions. They cheered on job outsourcing so long as it made their retirement investments go up. They threw their fellow co-workers under the the bus and greased the rungs lower than theirs if it meant a bigger paycheck and less competition. And so corporations divided and conquered a middle class that was too busy being self-absorbed. Its already conquered.... its gone. Some semblance of the middle class exists on paper but really in terms of power its as good as dead. Corporations and the upper middle are basically just taking their sweet time milking the rest of the dumb middle class at their leisure. They don't wanna kill it because the poor are so much worse to deal with. It would almost be merciful at this point if the middle class was finished off economically. At least then the 99% would actually band together.