• 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

Status
Not open for further replies.
#541
two fingers said:
The government creates the situations you are referring to. Costly regulation and taxes are the primary reasons for jobs moving overseas, not wages. So, no corporation has threatened "We will move overseas unless you take lower pay".

Sooooooo try again.
Click to expand...

I'll have to disagree with you here. By far the largest expense of most businesses is wages. Therefore it stands to reason that the lower labor costs offered in foreign counties would be a huge incentive towards greater profits.

Not overseas per se, but the workers of the Rubbermaid plant in Virginia were told, quite explicitly, that they would have to accept lower wages or else they'd move the plant to Mexico. They didn't say reduce regulations or we'll move. That had nothing to do with regulations.
 
#544
Unrepresented said:
I would likely have developed the food chain differently if it were upon me to create a more moral way for living things to coexist.....
Click to expand...


hmmmm....welllll......on another thread we have pretty much decided that the universe was NOT created but simply came into existence @ 20 billion years ago (or so)

and life on earth is pretty much the result of chemical reactions that have changed over the years....progressing from blue green algae** to more complex forms and so on, up to the present time

and the food chain is neither good nor bad, it just IS.....

am i wrong here...have i said anything you disagree with?....

so, in the absence of a creator.....who possibly COULD have called on you or anyone to create a MORE moral food chain?....(and, of course, that is an oxymoron, because the food chain is, likewise, neither moral nor immoral.....it just IS)....

i mean, how can you have a "more moral" food chain, when there is no morality at all IN the food chain?....it's like Alice said to the Mad Hatter - "How can i have more tea when i haven't had any yet?"....when one blue green algum absorbed another one, was it behaving in an immoral fashion?

so, i get back to my post several places ago...crying about morality where none exists nor ever existed, nor ever can exist is like crying about the law of gravity as you fall off a building

davesignatureII-1.png


ps-edit ** or maybe stromatolites
 
#548
NWB said:
I'll have to disagree with you here. By far the largest expense of most businesses is wages. Therefore it stands to reason that the lower labor costs offered in foreign counties would be a huge incentive towards greater profits.

Not overseas per se, but the workers of the Rubbermaid plant in Virginia were told, quite explicitly, that they would have to accept lower wages or else they'd move the plant to Mexico. They didn't say reduce regulations or we'll move. That had nothing to do with regulations.
Click to expand...

In my opinion it always has to do with regulation. Why didn't the employer just drop their wages and tell them to like it lump it.

Regulations.
 
#549
BawanaRik said:
No, I'm correct. Without the rich persons 10 K in the bank they can't lend the 100K.

And it would be better for all if they had the whole 100K to loan.

Thanks for the chance to clear that up!
Click to expand...

A rich persons 10k in the bank? Do you realize this money is pulled out of thin air... As in once the third bank receives the payment they can loan out 1 million dollars.. That's 10 100,000$ homes based off of the actual 10,000$ that exists...

Oh and by the way if you have 10k you aren't exactly rich...
 
#552
Tony Flow MMMM said:
A rich persons 10k in the bank? Do you realize this money is pulled out of thin air... As in once the third bank receives the payment they can loan out 1 million dollars.. That's 10 100,000$ homes based off of the actual 10,000$ that exists...

Oh and by the way if you have 10k you aren't exactly rich...
Click to expand...

What happens to it when they put it in an offshore bank?
 
#555
fisticuffs said:
The top tax rate in "the good old days" 1950 was 91%.
Click to expand...

two fingers said:
91% of income is robbery.
Click to expand...

two fingers said:
I never said it was. The person I was quoting/responding to did. According to HIM the highest tax rate in 1950 was 91%.
Click to expand...

The highest tax rate WAS 91%.

Problem is - being in the 91% tax bracket DOESN'T mean that you pay 91% of your income. It means you pay 91% of your income that falls into that bracket.

Both the millionaire and the person barely above the poverty line pay the same 10% on their first $8,900 of income.
 
#556
two fingers said:
OK, fine. Let's try to stay a little bit specific. HOW are they being "blocked from skills and assets"? What skills? What assets? Why can't some people get them? Who is blocking them? How are they doing it?
Click to expand...
Skills being education, talent, training, insight, experience, etc.

There are costs to access those whether it be tuition, dues, internships, etc. The government gives a limited amount for free (decreasingly so as budgets get continually cut) and the rest is a mixture of for profit and not-for-profit.

Assets are those things that one acquires with the net you've invested your "skills" in. You can have deeds, corporations, consumer goods, diplomas, titles, copyrights etc.

Those are not divided equally among the population at any given time, since there are continually new entrants (16, 18, 21 year olds) coming into an already established society. And that's the best case scenario assuming that all of those 16, 18, 21 year olds had equal schools, tutors, parenting, safety, income, nutrition, etc.
 
#557
Before you (the OP) gets mad at the richest 1%... look at the amount of tax you actually pay per gallon of gas. In Texas my state tax plus excise tax per gallon of unleaded is 38.4 cents. You should get mad at he government before the top 1% earners. Gas effects all of us.

Fuel tax revenue to the US in 2009 was $38 billion.

Pick your battles OP.

Speaking of Gas... I need to visit the for sale section of TB!!
 
#558
NWB said:
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.
Click to expand...

It's very expensive to ship jobs off shore. People need to be trained, factories built etc.

But what I think many people are missing is that some US corps are building factories in other nations to provide local demand. IE Ford building factories in China. The future of the auto market is China. Why not have a factory there?

The US market is saturated. Pretty much every one here has a car and if they care for it will last for years.
 
#559
Relic said:
Of free beer for everybody?? Beer works wonders for looks
Click to expand...

MatticusMania said:
And, since beer is food we'll have fed the hungry.
Click to expand...

I, Son of Beer and Fantasy Moderator Overlord, approve of this.

You may also take note that this will also have a huge positive environmental impact as it would greatly reduce CO2 emissions due to people not driving because of drunkness.

#wefixedtheworld
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back