US: Gap between rich and poor widest on record.

[Craig234]

"This country" was built by the rich. Take away the rich, and what do you have? The Soviet Union.

Take a look at the skyline of NY. That wasn't built by non profit organizations.

You're a right-wing cultist. It's interesting to watch, but dangerous since you can vote.

You should help settle which side is 'elitist'. Only the rich built America. Utter ignorance.

 

[1prophet]

Income is irrelevant. The only relevant metric is buying power. Wage floors reduce buying power. Period.

Lower the wage floors and more companies can hire more people. Making $4/hr is a lot better than making $0/hr. It also means that domestic labor is more attractive. It also means that domestically produced EVERYTHINGS are less expensive, meaning lower prices for everyone. Meaning more BUYING POWER for those at the bottom and middle.

Stop focusing on income and start focusing on the factors that keep buying power low. Here's a tip: it starts with a high minimum wage.

That's a fallacy, illegals can make more , sometimes alot more than minimum wage yet Americans still won't do those jobs.

http://www.kirotv.com/money/25176358/detail.html

Despite Economy, Americans Don't Want Farm Work

Debate Has Raged Over Whether Immigrants Taking Jobs Americans Want

VISALIA, Calif. -- It's a question rekindled by the recession: Are immigrants taking jobs away from American citizens? In the heart of the nation's biggest farming state, the answer is a resounding no. Government data analyzed by The Associated Press show most Americans simply don't apply to harvest fruits and vegetables. And the few Americans who do usually don't stay in the fields. "It's just not something that most Americans are going to pack up their bags and move here to do," said farmer Steve Fortin, who pays $10.25 an hour to foreign workers to trim strawberry plants at his nursery near the Nevada border.

Making 10.25 an hour is more than double your 4.00 an hour proposal yet Americans are still few and far, and you think somehow by lowering minimum wages you will get more of them to work?

 

[drebo]

That's a fallacy, illegals can make more , sometimes alot more than minimum wage yet Americans still won't do those jobs.

That's the biggest lie of them all.

 

[GuitarDaddy]

Just as has played out many times in history the rich will remain totally oblivious to the threat of revolution until the instant that the peasants quitely slit their throats

 

[Patranus]

How does one persons success prevent you from being successful?

 

[her209]

You're being ridiculous, so typical of an ATOT response. Education, job title, or even hours worked has nothing to do with which class you are in.

How much does a person make? That's what determines their class setting. NOTHING else.

Errr... how does your employer figure how much to pay you? How do you figure how much your employer should be paying you? Education, job titile, and experience. Its also sad fact of life that a degree can keep you from being considered for a job that you want or someone being picked over you for a position. If education and degrees didn't matter, why do people try to get into good colleges? Why do people spend upwards of $40,000 on a undergraduate college degree? Its not because they want to learn. Lastly, does your boss make more money than you? Does his boss make more than him? And so on and so on.

Lebron James has no college degree and works 3 hours a night 3 to 4 nights a week, for 8 months out of the year. Does that make him a part time employed lower class person?

Bwhahaha... how many Lebron James or sports entertainers, because that's what he is, are there in the US? Also fail on the part of LeBron working only 3 hours a night 3 to 4 nights a week. You realize that there is this thing called "practice"?

 

[blackangst1]

How in the world is raising taxes on the "wealthy" going to make the "poor" less poor.

Bump since no one has explained it. Take 50% of the top 10%'s wealth away, and the poor are...still poor.

Oh wait...redistribution perhaps?

 

[BurnItDwn]

Who gives a shit? Standard of living for everyone is the greatest in the history of mankind.

How are you measuring Standard of Living? And, what country are you talking about?
If you go by the Human Development Index, then here is the "top 10"

http://hdr.undp.org/en/statistics/
Norway, Australia, Iceland, Canada, Ireland, Netherlands, Sweden, France, Switzerland, Japan?

If you are going by strictly by GDP Per capita, then the US moves up to #9, or if you go by GDP PPP per capita, to #6, #5, or #8 depending upon source....

But, these are all based upon "mean" values rather than "median" values ....
And, what you'll see is that the mean is significantly lower than the median, because, the truth of the matter is, that a very large portion of society is living on the edge, yes, they may have a TV or a car, but, in much of the country, no car = no job, and, you can pretty much get a TV for next to nothing... So, what you wind up with is a system where the necessities take up 90% of the person's income, and they spend 10% on luxuries, which are cheap in our society.

So, yes, in today's world, the poor have more "nice things" than the poor had 100 years ago, but, the fact of the matter is, almost 30% of the population in the country is "poor", and another 30% are running on a thin enough budget that something serious could bankrupt them.... So, you only really have maybe 40% or so of the country that could be called financially "secure" by any stretch of the imagination...

Piece of mind is worth a lot more than a TV or a fancy car.

 

[IceBergSLiM]

Who gives a shit? Standard of living for everyone is the greatest in the history of mankind.

yeah for now. They are slowly bringing us down to 3rd world instead of brining the 3rd world up to meet us. No thanks.

 

[Pocatello]

Just as has played out many times in history the rich will remain totally oblivious to the threat of revolution until the instant that the peasants quitely slit their throats

Killing rich people and stealing their land doesn't make poor people richer.

 

[bfdd]

Errr... how does your employer figure how much to pay you? How do you figure how much your employer should be paying you? Education, job titile, and experience. Its also sad fact of life that a degree can keep you from being considered for a job that you want or someone being picked over you for a position. If education and degrees didn't matter, why do people try to get into good colleges? Why do people spend upwards of $40,000 on a undergraduate college degree? Its not because they want to learn. Lastly, does your boss make more money than you? Does his boss make more than him? And so on and so on.


Bwhahaha... how many Lebron James or sports entertainers, because that's what he is, are there in the US? Also fail on the part of LeBron working only 3 hours a night 3 to 4 nights a week. You realize that there is this thing called "practice"?

They figure out how much to pay you based on what you're worth. Those things add worth, but they don't define worth. Why spend 40k on an undergrad degree, when you can spend 0 and start off making 40-50k a year doing a blue collar job? Why spend 40k and 4 years on a degree, when in those 4 years you can make 200-300k? Type of work and worth vary from job to job. To say "you need this kind of degree and this kind of work to be middle class" is stupid.

 

[Pocatello]

They figure out how much to pay you based on what you're worth. Those things add worth, but they don't define worth. Why spend 40k on an undergrad degree, when you can spend 0 and start off making 40-50k a year doing a blue collar job? Why spend 40k and 4 years on a degree, when in those 4 years you can make 200-300k? Type of work and worth vary from job to job. To say "you need this kind of degree and this kind of work to be middle class" is stupid.

The trick is to find a job that pays enough isn't it?

 

[QuantumPion]

You misunderstand. Wealth is not created when raw materials are put into finished products.

Theoretically wealth is only created when unclaimed land is mined of the Earth for basic human needs (see my post above). When, as you claim, businesses create goods from materials, where did the materials come from? They were bought. It's the farmers and miners that create wealth, alone, and only when it's from land that was acquired without cost.

If a man buys a plot of land to mine for ore, where was there creation of wealth? A fair price was paid for the land in exchange for the rights to mine. The ore was sold to consumers and businesses who already had wealth. The miner acquire wealth that was previously in the hands of the ore buyers. This is a zero sum exchange.

For all intents and purposes, hardly no wealth is actually "created" today, so this is a mute discussion. This is why we are seeing globally a truly zero sum economy, unlike what has been see in the past 500 years with this expansion of wealth in North America, where a society/wealth was created literally out of nothing and not having to had pay for the basic human goods (ore or food) from another person (as the land was not previously owned, although it was occupied, but not utilized), we just claimed land and built a society on it. That's the only form of wealth creation.

You are completely and stupefyingly misinformed. Wealth is a measure of labor and productivity. A miner with a shovel produces a little wealth. A miner with a tunnel-boring machine produces much more wealth. An engineer that knows how to make a runnel-boring machine makes a LOT of wealth, even though he didn't mine a single ounce of coal himself.

To claim that the total wealth of the world is a zero sum game is ludicrous - just look at China and India in the last 20 years for the most obvious example. In fact the total wealth and productivity of humanity as a whole has been increasing exponentially since the industrial revolution allowed people to exist as more than subsistence farmers.

 

[Pocatello]

You are completely and stupefyingly misinformed. Wealth is a measure of labor and productivity. A miner with a shovel produces a little wealth. A miner with a tunnel-boring machine produces much more wealth. An engineer that knows how to make a runnel-boring machine makes a LOT of wealth, even though he didn't mine a single ounce of coal himself.

To claim that the total wealth of the world is a zero sum game is ludicrous - just look at China and India in the last 20 years for the most obvious example. In fact the total wealth and productivity of humanity as a whole has beenhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gross_world_product increasing exponentially since the industrial revolution allowed people to exist as more than subsistence farmers.

While I don't agree with "wealth is a zero sum game", the U.S. has been transferring its wealth to China and India and other third world countries. We have transferred jobs, technologies, knowledge, and money because it is profitable in the short term. Of course, India and China are creating their own wealth too.

 

[Throckmorton]

How does one persons success prevent you from being successful?

The more wealth concentrated in the upper echelons, the lower the bar for "success" of the lower echelons.

Wouldn't you consider the middle wealth quintile to be successful? Well they only have 4% of this country's wealth. In the rest of the developed world, being in the middle means you are much better off than here.

 

[Pocatello]

The more wealth concentrated in the upper echelons, the lower the bar for "success" of the lower echelons.

Wouldn't you consider the middle wealth quintile to be successful? Well they only have 4% of this country's wealth. In the rest of the developed world, being in the middle means you are much better off than here.

How much better?

 

[Zebo]

Just as has played out many times in history the rich will remain totally oblivious to the threat of revolution until the instant that the peasants quitely slit their throats

Unfortunately poor are stupid so it will take awile. I mean I'd riot and burn in Balboa and hamptons not south central.

The rest of us, the vast middle, want no trouble and appreciate crumbs thrown down.

 

[QuantumPion]

While I don't agree with "wealth is a zero sum game", the U.S. has been transferring its wealth to China and India and other third world countries. We have transferred jobs, technologies, knowledge, and money because it is profitable in the short term. Of course, India and China are creating their own wealth too.

When goods people want to buy are made cheaper, those people have more money to buy on other goods and services. It's a net gain in total wealth. New jobs are created to cater to the increased purchasing power you have.

It's unfortunate that unskilled or low-skilled workers lose their jobs overseas, but do you really think it is a good idea to hamper progress for the sake of pity? Where would we be if the government banned the internal combustion engine because it threatened put all of the horse and mule caretakers out of work? Or banned the electronic computer, because it threatened to put all of the human computers (i.e. people paid to do simple math calculations all day) out of work?

 

[Thump553]

I wonder how far back their records go, as I find it dificult to believe that the income disparity is greater now than in the era of the robber barons. At least I hope not-for if it is greater, then the American Dream is dead for all intents and purposes. The USA will become just a larger version of a South American oligopoly.

 

[KIAman]

For the most part, yes.

Let me guess, are you one of those people who makes $90k and then thinks you're middle class?

Middle class is $25k to $60k tops, IMO. Anything higher is upper middle class.

It depends on where you live. In plenty of states, making $90k a year is being rich while some states, it is pretty smack dab middle class while in some rare areas, you are poor as dirt.

The hard part to analyze in a study like the OP is that they treat the USA as an entire single demographic. We are really 50 major demographics and tens of thousands of sub demographics. Everything is different in terms of cost, taxes, income and standard of living between them.

 

[Pocatello]

When goods people want to buy are made cheaper, those people have more money to buy on other goods and services. It's a net gain in total wealth. New jobs are created to cater to the increased purchasing power you have.

It's unfortunate that unskilled or low-skilled workers lose their jobs overseas, but do you really think it is a good idea to hamper progress for the sake of pity? Where would we be if the government banned the internal combustion engine because it threatened put all of the horse and mule caretakers out of work? Or banned the electronic computer, because it threatened to put all of the human computers (i.e. people paid to do simple math calculations all day) out of work?

Let's look at how the Korean car company like Hyundai became successful. It used to make crappy cars that nobody wanted. It took a while for Hyundai cars to become world class. While Korean automakers were struggling to make quality cars, the Korean government put high tariffs on all imports, to protect its own auto industry, still does. From what you're saying, Hyundai would never need to improve itself, but that is not the case. Other companies like Samsung also had similar protection from competitive imports, but Samsung did not stagnate. I'm not saying we should follow the Korean model of protection, but we need to find ways to keep good paying jobs in this country. In truth, we need to create jobs for the unskilled and low-skilled workers too. Nobody is talking about taking extreme measures which stagnate development, but politicians always talk in extreme terms, i.e, this is good and that is bad. That's not how the world works, and it doesn't work for this country either.

 

[Zebo]

I wonder how far back their records go, as I find it dificult to believe that the income disparity is greater now than in the era of the robber barons. At least I hope not-for if it is greater, then the American Dream is dead for all intents and purposes. The USA will become just a larger version of a South American oligopoly.

In robbr barron era you could live on free land and eek out existence. Today you must work to live in a place. As such, you need a paying job, and it seems they are not avail for everyone. I'd classify that as worse. w/o governemnt taking up the slack, 2/3 of Americans depending on Gov spending one way or another, we'd be in for a world of hurt.

 

[Zebo]

"It took a while for Hyundai cars to become world class"


LOLZ

 

[Zebo]

Let's look at how the Korean car company like Hyundai became successful. It used to make crappy cars that nobody wanted. It took a while for Hyundai cars to become world class. While Korean automakers were struggling to make quality cars, the Korean government put high tariffs on all imports, to protect its own auto industry, still does. From what you're saying, Hyundai would never need to improve itself, but that is not the case. Other companies like Samsung also had similar protection from competitive imports, but Samsung did not stagnate. I'm not saying we should follow the Korean model of protection, but we need to find ways to keep good paying jobs in this country. In truth, we need to create jobs for the unskilled and low-skilled workers too. Nobody is talking about taking extreme measures which stagnate development, but politicians always talk in extreme terms, i.e, this is good and that is bad. That's not how the world works, and it doesn't work for this country either.

Asians have cultural man on the street protection too. They are not stupid like Americans are and will not put food on American tables if at all possible. Germans make real world class cars, but I did not see one in Japan. Did not see one in China.

 

[QuantumPion]

Let's look at how the Korean car company like Hyundai became successful. It used to make crappy cars that nobody wanted. It took a while for Hyundai cars to become world class. While Korean automakers were struggling to make quality cars, the Korean government put high tariffs on all imports, to protect its own auto industry, still does. From what you're saying, Hyundai would never need to improve itself, but that is not the case. Other companies like Samsung also had similar protection from competitive imports, but Samsung did not stagnate. I'm not saying we should follow the Korean model of protection, but we need to find ways to keep good paying jobs in this country. In truth, we need to create jobs for the unskilled and low-skilled workers too. Nobody is talking about taking extreme measures which stagnate development, but politicians always talk in extreme terms, i.e, this is good and that is bad. That's not how the world works, and it doesn't work for this country either.

You're missing the minor itty bitty point that Hyundai and Samsung compete for business, with, well you know, the entire freaking world.

While the economy is certainly not a zero-sum game, tariffs actually are. For every job saved by a tariff, another job is lost due to the increased prices people have to pay for goods and services, or jobs lost by companies that relocate or go out of business.

It's called the broken window fallacy. Government forcing people to pay higher prices for goods is exactly the same as a kid throwing a brick through the baker's glass window to make work for the glazier - completely missing the fact that the baker could have bought a new suit with the money he now has to spend to replace his window with.

Just because high tariffs are not as radical as banning motors or computers doesn't mean they are a good idea - or even beneficial. I use an extreme example as an analogy to make clear the fallacy of such thinking.