The numbers don't lie

Page 5 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Throckmorton

Lifer
Aug 23, 2007
16,829
3
0
This article lost a lot of credit with me as impartial once they grouped anyone making under $165k as the bottom 90%.
I don't fall in the top 10% but I certainly don't fit in with the people making $31k. How about a more realistic breakdown. I'm sure there are a ton of people in the 50-75k range alone.

Look at the graphs. Everything is broken down into quintiles
 

Zebo

Elite Member
Jul 29, 2001
39,398
19
81
I don't think the disparity really matters for the US. Even most of those in the lower income brackets have housing with heat and AC, they have HD TV's and cable, computers and internet and do not go hungry. Not a whole lot for them to get upset over.

For now. They still eat and get checks for sitting at home. Can't mask it forever. Debt is doing the job for now but that must end. Either interest begins to take 100% of revenue or we print like mad causing hyperinflation but no matter what hiding the wealth erosion and middle's and lower class poverty is unsustainable. I think I heard that word 20x in SofU speeches this last round. Everyone knows what's coming.
 
Last edited:

Throckmorton

Lifer
Aug 23, 2007
16,829
3
0
I eat and have a computer and internet... But my cash flow is negative. Credit is an amazing thing.

Oh yeah, I just took the last $1600 out of my IRA so I could pay for a training trip to Honolulu (the County reimburses you after the fact), so retirement savings you can raid are also an amazing thing.
 
Nov 30, 2006
15,456
389
121
You can volunteer to pay more so they can pay less. No skin off of my back.

Not sure how you arrive that they aren't doing better. Their percent of income went up by 305% while their percent of tax went up 246%. If their tax rates would have remained the same, it would have went up by 305% instead of 246%. Just exactly what is wrong with that picture that has you riled up?

Are you bitching because the people, who's incomes have regressed after inflation for the last decade + aren't paying enough? You wanting the lower's to pay more so the uppers can pay less?
Lol...I'm not "riled up" or "bitching"...just trying to have a civil discussion. But I'm getting a vibe that this may be difficult for you.
 

Zebo

Elite Member
Jul 29, 2001
39,398
19
81
95% of what is said about liberals here is wrong or lies, I can't remember the other 5%.



No, you're not. That's what progressives are for that the right including you fight them on as your 'policies'.

You are just too clueless to understand the effect of the policies you push.

You are a dupe of the right-wing propaganda to sell you on polices - let's take the dishonestly named 'fair tax' for example, that does nothing but shift taxes off the rich.

That's the point of their propaganda, lie to you to get you to back policies good for them.
No really. Fair tax as I understand it is a flat tax @~20-25% no deductions no exclusions, no discounts from source.. e.g. capital gains, dividends all count.. No rich pay 20% now. It's said they pay 17% but it's really much much lower because they reduce basis via expenses tremendously which s not allowed under fair tax.
 
Last edited:

Throckmorton

Lifer
Aug 23, 2007
16,829
3
0
No really. Fair tax as I understand it is a flat tax @~20-25% no deductions no exclusions, no discounts from source.. e.g. capital gains.. No rich pay 20% now. It's said they pay 17% but it's really much much lower because they reduce basis via expenses tremendously which s not allowed under fair tax.

Well the top 1% earns 22% of income and pay 40% of total taxes... so the tax system is obviously still progressive. Unless their income is really much much more than 22% of total because they have ways of disguising income, like stock options.
 
Nov 30, 2006
15,456
389
121
Didnt slow em down none from getting richer.
Yes...the rich got richer all right...but the important question to ask is "Why?". It might be wise to answer this before jumping to conclusions that increased taxation is the answer to the problem.
 

LegendKiller

Lifer
Mar 5, 2001
18,256
68
86
Somebody above mentioned the fact that the rich are getting richer off of the backs of labor being outsourced to China.

That's 100% of the problem, China. The second we brand them a currency manipulator and slap a tariff on them is the second you see a HUGE portion of jobs come back here. It's also the reason why we are persuing QE.

We are loading a 357 and putting it against China's head. They either revalue or they drown in inflation. One way or another, this bullshit has to end.

I only wish our politicians had the balls to stand up against the people who are not only outsourcing jobs to China for labor arbitrage, but also doubling down by investing a huge amount of money with the Chinese for superior returns.
 

Engineer

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
39,230
701
126
Somebody above mentioned the fact that the rich are getting richer off of the backs of labor being outsourced to China.

That's 100% of the problem, China. The second we brand them a currency manipulator and slap a tariff on them is the second you see a HUGE portion of jobs come back here. It's also the reason why we are persuing QE.

We are loading a 357 and putting it against China's head. They either revalue or they drown in inflation. One way or another, this bullshit has to end.

I only wish our politicians had the balls to stand up against the people who are not only outsourcing jobs to China for labor arbitrage, but also doubling down by investing a huge amount of money with the Chinese for superior returns.

:thumbsup:
 

bfdd

Lifer
Feb 3, 2007
13,312
1
0
The engineer with a masters degree whose job was eliminated and shipped off somewhere else because he was 'too expensive'. Was he lazy/unmotivated? The more white collar jobs get eliminated, the more competition there is for those few remaining jobs and wages will be brought down and there will be mass unemployment. This isn't just affecting your 'lazy poor people'.

Then maybe we Americans need to start living more humble lives and take lower pay. I mean if someone somewhere else is willing to do it for cheaper... we have to compete so we have to offer better incentives than just "cheaper" the problem is, we can't.
 

Craig234

Lifer
May 1, 2006
38,548
350
126
Then maybe we Americans need to start living more humble lives and take lower pay. I mean if someone somewhere else is willing to do it for cheaper... we have to compete so we have to offer better incentives than just "cheaper" the problem is, we can't.

And just ignore the systemic problems costing the nation *trillions* with drainage from Wall Street and other corruptions. You just ignore that part of the situation.
 

Zebo

Elite Member
Jul 29, 2001
39,398
19
81
Well the top 1% earns 22% of income and pay 40% of total taxes... so the tax system is obviously still progressive. Unless their income is really much much more than 22% of total because they have ways of disguising income, like stock options.

Not true throck. Don't believe these right wing lies. Income tax is not total tax. Income taxes make up ~ 50% of what govt takes in. All other taxes they take in are REGRESSIVE. SS, excise etc. Tax rate is flat right now. Employees pay about 20% the rich pay about 20%
 

Zebo

Elite Member
Jul 29, 2001
39,398
19
81
Yes...the rich got richer all right...but the important question to ask is "Why?". It might be wise to answer this before jumping to conclusions that increased taxation is the answer to the problem.

Why is because it doesn't matter what taxes are. It's about what you control. Do you have control to make congress sellout American workers and build slave labor factories in China? You're gonna get rich. Do you have control over FBI and SEC so they don't investigate FRAUD and securities violations? You're gonna get rich. Do you have control over politicians to get no bid contracts? You're gonna get rich. Can you get 1% FED loans and lend it out form 6-29% to Americans. You're gonna get rich. etc etc etc

This concentration of control is the natural course of things I talked about earlier. Happens everywhere under every economic system for all time, like a universal truth. The only way to correct it is revolutions or redistribution. Some rich realize this. Gates, Buffet et al. Some don't. The right plebes are utterly clueless.
 
Last edited:

LegendKiller

Lifer
Mar 5, 2001
18,256
68
86
Then maybe we Americans need to start living more humble lives and take lower pay. I mean if someone somewhere else is willing to do it for cheaper... we have to compete so we have to offer better incentives than just "cheaper" the problem is, we can't.

We can compete, easily. The problem is the currency.
 

silverpig

Lifer
Jul 29, 2001
27,703
12
81
Well the top 1% earns 22% of income and pay 40% of total taxes... so the tax system is obviously still progressive. Unless their income is really much much more than 22% of total because they have ways of disguising income, like stock options.

Maybe it's the top 1% earns 22% of TAXABLE income...
 

The-Noid

Diamond Member
Nov 16, 2005
3,117
4
76
Somebody above mentioned the fact that the rich are getting richer off of the backs of labor being outsourced to China.

That's 100% of the problem, China. The second we brand them a currency manipulator and slap a tariff on them is the second you see a HUGE portion of jobs come back here. It's also the reason why we are persuing QE.

We are loading a 357 and putting it against China's head. They either revalue or they drown in inflation. One way or another, this bullshit has to end.

I only wish our politicians had the balls to stand up against the people who are not only outsourcing jobs to China for labor arbitrage, but also doubling down by investing a huge amount of money with the Chinese for superior returns.

Its labor and regulation arbitrage. The sheer fact of the matter is that we have setup factories and other industry that would not meet many US pollution and other regulation. Moving many of these jobs back to the USA would not only cause an increase in cost via the labor rate but also the increase regulatory cost so you are getting hit on two ends.

The Renminbi:American Dollar appreciation will only help on a labor or PPP problem it isn't going to help on a regulatory exchange problem.

To move jobs back to the USA we need both appreciation of the Chinese currency and a simultaneous increase in pollution and regulation in China or a decrease in our pollution and regulatory stance.

Going to China is something that most Americans can't even understand. No matter how much you hear it the pollution is SO much worse than anything you can imagine.
 
Last edited:

Acanthus

Lifer
Aug 28, 2001
19,915
2
76
ostif.org
Reality doesn't lie either. Worthless piece of shits stay worthless, producers make money.

"80% of the nation is lazy"

lol awesome.

Inequality has driven nearly every revolution in the history of man.

See what happens when the have-nots strike back.

The gini index was ~51 last year and is rising very rapidly.
 
Last edited:

Acanthus

Lifer
Aug 28, 2001
19,915
2
76
ostif.org
Its labor and regulation arbitrage. The sheer fact of the matter is that we have setup factories and other industry that would not meet many US pollution and other regulation. Moving many of these jobs back to the USA would not only cause an increase in cost via the labor rate but also the increase regulatory cost so you are getting hit on two ends.

The Renminbi depreciation will only help on a labor or PPP problem it isn't going to help on a regulatory exchange problem.

To move jobs back to the USA we need both appreciation of the Chinese currency and a simultaneous increase in pollution and regulation in China or a decrease in our pollution and regulatory stance.

Going to China is something that most Americans can't even understand. No matter how much you hear it the pollution is SO much worse than anything you can imagine.

You are leaving out the fact that Americans would also be making infinitely more money for the economy than they would on welfare or unemployment for 3 years.