The real class warfare and who's losing

[SamurAchzar]

That is not and has never been a problem. It's the other direction that's a problem.

The tax base figures say otherwise. These say 47% of the public pay no federal income tax, sponsored in large part by the 1% that pays 22x it's share per capita.

Try looking at the balance in the 1940-1980 period. Works much better.

I'd be happy to see the figures.

 

[SamurAchzar]

Yes, there are. You are defending something entirely different.

We were discussing the gravitation of manual labor towards the places it's most cost effective. This is unavoidable. Production will move towards where it makes most economical sense, otherwise you're just giving a huge gift to foreign companies that are free to manufacture where it's cheap.

 

[Engineer]

We were discussing the gravitation of manual labor towards the places it's most cost effective. This is unavoidable. Production will move towards where it makes most economical sense, otherwise you're just giving a huge gift to foreign companies that are free to manufacture where it's cheap.

What we need up front is a currency change in which the currencies around the world are on equal footing. Talk about knocking cheap foreign labor in the gutter.

Until then, enjoy the rising bottom taking more for themselves....one way or another.

 

[SamurAchzar]

What we need up front is a currency change in which the currencies around the world are on equal footing. Talk about knocking cheap foreign labor in the gutter.

Until then, enjoy the rising bottom taking more for themselves....one way or another.

Even if it was feasible - and it's not, as the difficulties in the Eurozone demonstrate - how will this help the problem?

 

[soundforbjt]

The bottom 90 percent have been saddled with 73 percent of all debt. In other words much of their so-called wealth is connected to debt.

Debt is slavery for many, especially with egregious credit card companies taking people out with absurd credit card tricks for years. Yet the corporate propaganda machine is strong and mighty.

Have you ever received an inheritance? A large one? Probably not, because only 1.6% of all Americans receive an inheritance larger than $100,000. If this is the case, why in the world do politicians worry so much about the tax impacts of this?

Because they want to keep the corporatocracy alive and well so their spawn can get a piece of their pie. They give the illusion to average Americans that if you only work hard enough you too can join this elusive club of cronies. Facts show otherwise.

 

[SamurAchzar]

Because they want to keep the corporatocracy alive and well so their spawn can get a piece of their pie. They give the illusion to average Americans that if you only work hard enough you too can join this elusive club of cronies. Facts show otherwise.

What's stopping you from becoming a wealthy man? Is there any deliberate policy in place, any conspiracy, secret fraternity that's preventing you from joining?

 

[theeedude]

The tax base figures say otherwise. These say 47% of the public pay no federal income tax, sponsored in large part by the 1% that pays 22x it's share per capita.



I'd be happy to see the figures.

Ignoring payroll taxes, I am not surprised.

 

[Engineer]

Even if it was feasible - and it's not, as the difficulties in the Eurozone demonstrate - how will this help the problem?

So you're saying that if China's currency was on equal footing as ours, it wouldn't make a difference in buying it from them instead of making it ourselves? China's currency would need to rise at least 40% (or more) just to be on a close footing with ours.

I'm too tired to argue with you anymore. Just keep in mind as the standard of living of the lower and lower middle classes drop in the US while those at the top continue to accumulate more and more, something will give....it always does. The "let them eat cake" defense doesn't work here....and never has.

 

[soundforbjt]

What's stopping you from becoming a wealthy man? Is there any deliberate policy in place, any conspiracy, secret fraternity that's preventing you from joining?

I'm as wealthy as I want to be right now. I'm semi-retired and in my fifties. Not too bad for a librul.

 

[Craig234]

What's stopping you from becoming a wealthy man? Is there any deliberate policy in place, any conspiracy, secret fraternity that's preventing you from joining?

The higher the concentration of wealth, the more limits on people getting rich by definition.

Is there any policy stopping any soldier from becoming Chairman of the JCS?

No, so let's let the Chairman be as abusive as he likes to the rest of the military under him.

He can treat all of them like slaves, have them dance naked for his entertainment, bring back lashing, whatever - the answer is if you don't like it, get to be chairman of the JCS.

Hey, great policy you have there.

 

[SamurAchzar]

Craig, we both know you can do much better than this analogy.

 

[Craig234]

The tax base figures say otherwise. These say 47% of the public pay no federal income tax, sponsored in large part by the 1% that pays 22x it's share per capita.

Their income has increased more than their taxes. Their tax rates are at record lows.

How would you like me to pay 20% of your taxes for you? No problem. Give me 25% of your income, and I'll pay them and call you a parasite for not paying enough taxes.

How would you like me to pay all of your income tax? Sure, give me 50% of your income and I will pay all of them and call you a parasite for not paying any income tax.

 

[Craig234]

Craig, we both know you can do much better than this analogy.

The problem isn't the analogy.

It's your inability to hear the issue because you are blinded by ideology.

For example, it didn't matter how an abolitionist explained a new paradigm on equality to a Mississippian in 1830, he wasn't going to hear it, he was locked into his ideology on race.

You are locked into some wrong ideological dogma on issues of wealth and economics that are blinding you.

 

[Doppel]

As long as the rich continue to say things like "You can be like us" to the unwashed masses, almost all of whom will never be wealthy, he can sell them on a dream and have them defend his wealth. It's predicated on the silly dream that one day they will be him and they hope somebody will defend theirs.

The point above about inheritance tax is fair. There is a lot of time spent catering to an extremely tiny minority of voters. Obviously because they are buying politicians or their corporations are.

 

[Craig234]

As long as the rich continue to say things like "You can be like us" to the unwashed masses, almost all of whom will never be wealthy, he can sell them on a dream and have them defend his wealth. It's predicated on the silly dream that one day they will be him and they hope somebody will defend theirs.

The point above about inheritance tax is fair. There is a lot of time spent catering to an extremely tiny minority of voters. Obviously because they are buying politicians or their corporations are.

It's ironic when you consider that the increased of concentration of wealth DECREASE opportunity for the 99%.

Of course, when it gets too extreme, to banana republic amounts, it becomes true that the little opportunity - like for some food - becomes totally dependent on the wealthy, turning the population into those begging peasants that they are so afraid big government will lead to. The right is paving the road to slavery this way.

 

[blackangst1]

It's ironic when you consider that the increased of concentration of wealth DECREASE opportunity for the 99%.

Of course, when it gets too extreme, to banana republic amounts, it becomes true that the little opportunity - like for some food - becomes totally dependent on the wealthy, turning the population into those begging peasants that they are so afraid big government will lead to. The right is paving the road to slavery this way.

Decreased opportunity? So, in your world, the doubling of the number of millionaires by 2020 is due to decreased opportunity? And the rise of 240,000 new millionaires from 2009 to 2010 is due to decreased opportunity?

I would love an exlaination.

 

[irishScott]

Well if this sucks so much, then the middle-class and lower left should find a leader who's willing to support this belief and then support said leader. Votes go to said leader(s), things change. This hasn't happened yet, and won't until things get a lot worse. People are so tied into being a D or an R that there's no support for the moderates.

 

[soundforbjt]

Decreased opportunity? So, in your world, the doubling of the number of millionaires by 2020 is due to decreased opportunity? And the rise of 240,000 new millionaires from 2009 to 2010 is due to decreased opportunity?

I would love an exlaination.

Most of those "millionaires" are name only and in debt. If the definition is wealth, then most of their wealth is tied up in their houses which they probably have large mortages on.

 

[Craig234]

I would love an exlaination.

No, you wouldn't. (I only saw your post because I was logged out and ignore was't working).

You do not want anything that contradicts your opinions, I suspect.

But let's pretend you would, and give you info. Probably its own thread soon.

http://motherjones.com/mojo/2011/10/study-income-inequality-kills-economic-growth

 

[blackangst1]

No, you wouldn't. (I only saw your post because I was logged out and ignore was't working).

You do not want anything that contradicts your opinions, I suspect.

But let's pretend you would, and give you info. Probably its own thread soon.

http://motherjones.com/mojo/2011/10/study-income-inequality-kills-economic-growth

Thats a great article to support your position of wealth accumulation; however, it doesnt address my refute to your lie that opportunity is decreased, specifically WRT the number of millionaires is increasing.

You do not want anything that contradicts your opinions, I suspect.

Nor do you.

 

[blackangst1]

Most of those "millionaires" are name only and in debt. If the definition is wealth, then most of their wealth is tied up in their houses which they probably have large mortages on.

Wrong. You fail at reading. Or comprehension. Or both.

Merrill and Capgemini define millionaires as individuals with $1 million or more in investible assets, not including primary home, collectibles, consumables and consumer durables.

 

[Fern]

Most of those "millionaires" are name only and in debt. If the definition is wealth, then most of their wealth is tied up in their houses which they probably have large mortages on.

No.

Just see the article:

Merrill and Capgemini define millionaires as individuals with $1 million or more in investible assets, not including primary home, collectibles, consumables and consumer durables.

The net worth would take debt into consideration, and their personal residence is not included in the calc.

Fern

 

[Jhhnn]

Thats a great article to support your position of wealth accumulation; however, it doesnt address my refute to your lie that opportunity is decreased, specifically WRT the number of millionaires is increasing.

So you acknowledge that concentration of wealth is increasing, right?

And that's good... because?

 

[Craig234]

No.

Just see the article:

The net worth would take into debt, and their personal residence is not included in the calc.

Fern

It's true, those at the top can do great in these times - we will see an 'increase in millionares'. It's the rest of the population paying for that that's the problem.

 

[soundforbjt]

No.

Just see the article:



The net worth would take into debt, and their personal residence is not included in the calc.

Fern

I didn't read the links earlier, so I wasn't aware of their definition.

Also from the article

Why are millionaires doing so much better than everyone else? Financial markets. Remember, the rich depend on financial markets (which have rebounded) while the rest of America depends on jobs and homes for wealth–both of which remain in a slump. According to the report, global equity markets rose 18% in 2010. Since the wealthy have a larger share of their fortunes in stocks, they would have benefited most.

They made their money investing, something the little guy can't afford to risk for the most part.