Okay . . . and illegal foreclosure is . . . get this . . . illegal. There are also people in the "lower" and middle classes who rob, burglarize, and murder the wealthy. Your example does nothing to prove that on a widescale basis one entire group was prohibiting another group from being able to thrive (which is what twofingers was asking for, and which in your response implied that you were providing that proof).
Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
US income inequality at record high
- Thread starter Tony Flow MMMM
- Start date
- Status
Okay . . . and illegal foreclosure is . . . get this . . . illegal. There are also people in the "lower" and middle classes who rob, burglarize, and murder the wealthy. Your example does nothing to prove that on a widescale basis one entire group was prohibiting another group from being able to thrive (which is what twofingers was asking for, and which in your response implied that you were providing that proof).
Mostly by using their wealth to push legislation which lowers economic burdens on themselves, thus requiring that burden to be picked up by lower classes.
See - recent changes in bankruptcy law for individuals vs. businesses, special treatments of investment income, etc.
Having to postpone a vacation. That's not tragic. Not being able to eat out. I cook my own food. I can give up pointers
It's my opinion that I think your statement proves that it's not a matter of any real danger to the middle class. Just the over expectations of an unhappy few.
I've read it here and there about the dwindling middle class, but I'd still like to find a statistical source of that statement. Not saying it isn't true, but I'd like a source study is all.
I can easily envision a scenario of the wealthy "screwing" the middle class. Consider the example of a large corporation moving its manufacturing operations offshore to communist China. The corporation gains increased profits from lower foreign labor costs while the erstwhile US workers are now on unemployment. Alternatively, the corporation may issue the threat of sending jobs offshore unless lower wage rates are accepted by the workers.
I don't believe I ever said you said it was tragic. Thanks for the chance to clear that up.
I never said it was. The person I was quoting/responding to did. According to HIM the highest tax rate in 1950 was 91%.
See my post #504 as a somewhat specific example. Although it is more directed at the middle and/or working class than poor.
I respect your opinions and welcome your thoughts on that post.
Alot of you guys have some interesting views. Some are completely whack.
From my modest perspective, I see three factors which have caused our (my family's) disposable income to erode over the last few years:
#1: insanely high taxes.
The dollar i earn at work gets taxed by the fed. Its now worth $.81. Then the State wants some. Now its worth $.60. I take my 60 cents to the neighborhood Arco for some petrol. Theres a 8% sales tax AND of course the $.75/gal California fuel tax.
The dollar paid by my work nets about 2 cups (.7 liters)of fuel. I would need to earn $8 to purchase ONE gallon of fuel. So I can drive to work. Ouch.
#2: Federal and State regulations forcing businesses (you know, those crazy 1%-ers) to move their operations out-of-state or overseas. So I get a pink slip from my employer because he's moving to Arizona. He says the worker's Comp insurance skyrocketed and he can no longer remain profitable operating in California. He says I can keep my job if I will re-locate to AZ. I cant. So now im unemployed. (this actually happened).
#3: The Fed keeps printing money it doesnt have.
Each dollar thats printed out of thin air has an impact on the value of the dollar in your wallet. And we all know what that is.
so, thats my 2 cents worth. Which actually cost me $.38.
From my modest perspective, I see three factors which have caused our (my family's) disposable income to erode over the last few years:
#1: insanely high taxes.
The dollar i earn at work gets taxed by the fed. Its now worth $.81. Then the State wants some. Now its worth $.60. I take my 60 cents to the neighborhood Arco for some petrol. Theres a 8% sales tax AND of course the $.75/gal California fuel tax.
The dollar paid by my work nets about 2 cups (.7 liters)of fuel. I would need to earn $8 to purchase ONE gallon of fuel. So I can drive to work. Ouch.
#2: Federal and State regulations forcing businesses (you know, those crazy 1%-ers) to move their operations out-of-state or overseas. So I get a pink slip from my employer because he's moving to Arizona. He says the worker's Comp insurance skyrocketed and he can no longer remain profitable operating in California. He says I can keep my job if I will re-locate to AZ. I cant. So now im unemployed. (this actually happened).
#3: The Fed keeps printing money it doesnt have.
Each dollar thats printed out of thin air has an impact on the value of the dollar in your wallet. And we all know what that is.
so, thats my 2 cents worth. Which actually cost me $.38.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_of_living_in_the_United_States
Interesting. It seems this article links poverty with a lack of education. With free public education being universal in the US I feel that it a choice not to graduate high school.
A poor choice. And like choices it come with results. Less than happy results.
But it does point out that the US material wealth beyond pretty much the rest of the world.
I think we have it pretty good. I have to careful with my money but I'm old. That's the way it is. I haven't been to Paris in ten years.
Hardly a tragedy. I have great memories of the place and hope to go again. First time I went it was the first day of summer and a huge party. But if I don't I am not going to blame the "rich".
Interesting. It seems this article links poverty with a lack of education. With free public education being universal in the US I feel that it a choice not to graduate high school.
A poor choice. And like choices it come with results. Less than happy results.
But it does point out that the US material wealth beyond pretty much the rest of the world.
I think we have it pretty good. I have to careful with my money but I'm old. That's the way it is. I haven't been to Paris in ten years.
Hardly a tragedy. I have great memories of the place and hope to go again. First time I went it was the first day of summer and a huge party. But if I don't I am not going to blame the "rich".
Making good choices is behavior that is taught and in the case of children in poverty it's not taught very well. Success in education has more to do with parental involvement than it does poverty but poverty is a major cause of reduced parental involvement. Mom and dad have less time with the children when they need to work 3 jobs to pay the bills your parents could pay with one.
That probably was a marginal tax rate. Seems more reasonable.
It still seems pretty high until you consider the historical context of paying off the massive debt incurred by funding WWII.
Alot of you guys have some interesting views. Some are completely whack.
From my modest perspective, I see three factors which have caused our (my family's) disposable income to erode over the last few years:
#1: insanely high taxes.
The dollar i earn at work gets taxed by the fed. Its now worth $.81. Then the State wants some. Now its worth $.60. I take my 60 cents to the neighborhood Arco for some petrol. Theres a 8% sales tax AND of course the $.75/gal California fuel tax.
The dollar paid by my work nets about 2 cups (.7 liters)of fuel. I would need to earn $8 to purchase ONE gallon of fuel. So I can drive to work. Ouch.
#2: Federal and State regulations forcing businesses (you know, those crazy 1%-ers) to move their operations out-of-state or overseas. So I get a pink slip from my employer because he's moving to Arizona. He says the worker's Comp insurance skyrocketed and he can no longer remain profitable operating in California. He says I can keep my job if I will re-locate to AZ. I cant. So now im unemployed. (this actually happened).
#3: The Fed keeps printing money it doesnt have.
Each dollar thats printed out of thin air has an impact on the value of the dollar in your wallet. And we all know what that is.
so, thats my 2 cents worth. Which actually cost me $.38.
I refer to the printing press money as A Net Worth Tax. It makes the money you have in the bank as well as any other net worth valued in dollars worth less.
If you feel it imagine how the wealthy feel it. In effect it's transfer wealth from those who save with positive net worth to those in debt with negative net worth. Because their debt is now effectively worth less.
I recall being a child and having coins made out of silver. Ask your grandparents. This really happened!
What great and glorious days they were!
If'n this is your idea of exploitation, shouldn't you be much more angry at the food chain?
Actually I'll bet they have more time due to the fact may of them probably getting that check from the Sugarman every month and don't need to work.
Here's an article about federal assistance. With food shelter, education and General assistance covered.
[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]
I have no problem with helping people who are unable to provide for themselves. I also don't have a problem with people who CAN provide for themselves.
No, it is not. That employer is providing a service I can't provide for myself. And MARKET and an OUTLET for my talents. Say, for instance, I am good a machining things (using various lathes and other equipment to make things out of metal). I can't go out and buy the million dollars worth of equipment it takes to machine metal. Even if I had a crapload of equipment, I simply can't start milling things for a profit (due in part to the ridiculous amount of regulations dealing with starting/running a business). Now, an employer comes along and says "I have all that equipment. I have a building. I have money. You have talent. Let;s see if we can work out a MUTUALLY BENEFICIAL COMBINATION of all those things." THAT is what employment is. I TOO and PROFITING from my talents, only in a way that I could not have done on my own. And nobody (in the private sector anyway) "created conditions" that made it harder for me to start my own business than it was the guy who hired me to machine things.
Employment is NOT the exploitation of anything. It is a CONTRACT that is AGREED TO by both parties. You provide service X, Y, and Z. I provide money. It is no different than my hiring a good HVAC installer (and paying through the nose for a new HVAC unit by the way). He provided me with a new unit and the labor to install it. I could have gone to anyone of my choosing to get a new system. I provided money in return for the new system and labor. And we both agreed to a level of compensation/satisfaction. Employment. I employed him.
Nobody at Wal-Mart is being exploited. Those people went to an office, willingly filled out an application, and agreed to provide X, Y, and Z (unboxing materials, running cash registers, etc.) in return for an agreed-upon amount of compensation. Everybody volunteered. End of story. Exploitation nonexistent.
Now, the phrase "true worth" is where it gets murky. We hear speeches all the time that claim "If we can save one life, then (giving up liberties X,Y and Z and pouring a gagillion dollars into the problem) will be all worth it." In my view, this simply is not the case. However, if you accept the premise of speeches like this, then NOBODY can be compensated for his "true worth". So, I find that to be a false argument, as well as an undefinable amount. And, you are correct in the assumption that just jumped into your head. In a free market, you are worth what the market will bare for your talents. So, here, whatever the most you can make for doing a particular job (or minimum wage, whichever comes first) IS the "true worth" of your particular talent. David Ortiz (Go SOX!) can whack a baseball a country mile. That is worth miliions because the market says it is. People will pay dearly to watch him do it or wear a shirt with his name on it (even ..... dare I say it...... the poor). Unboxing towels at Wal-Mart is worth $7 and change an hour. Anybody can do it. It is not a talent at all. So it is worth less. That doesn't mean that the people DOING it are worth less. But they are providing a service to society that we find to be worth less. However, if those towel unboxers were to learn how to fwack the living daylights out of a baseball, they could go stand right beside Big Poppy (Otriz) and make a gagillion dollars a minute in this country, rather than being told "get back to work" as they are in many others.
There you have it. Simple. And, in my view, beautiful in its simplicity.
I provided you with an example of a "group" (Bank of America, JPMorgan Chase, Wells Fargo, Citi and GMAC/Ally) of wealthy institutions that were able to "force" certain middle-class families into financial hardship. I never "implied" that I could prove that every single person above a certain income threshold was guilty of a crime. That seems like an unnecessarily high bar to clear, no? But if my one example (of $25 billion dollars of fraud in our top banks) proves "nothing" to you about the problems in this country, then I don't know what to tell you.
Were these individuals forced to take loans on homes that they could not afford?
- Status
