Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
Gary
Social climber
Where in the hell is Major Kong?
|
|
Too bad you don't have a clue for what the solution is.
Oh, I do.
|
|
HighDesertDJ
Trad climber
|
|
The solution is clearly to continue what we've been doing.
|
|
Gary
Social climber
Where in the hell is Major Kong?
|
|
The solution is clearly to continue what we've been doing.
Such as voting for plutocrats like Hillary?
|
|
HighDesertDJ
Trad climber
|
|
I hear presidents wield unchecked, unlimited power and that they implement their agenda through sheer will can anyone confirm/deny?
|
|
JEleazarian
Trad climber
Fresno CA
|
|
I've mulled over the increasing income inequality, and the surveys of increased wealth inequality, without finding easy answers. HDDJ's statistics from the survey of household wealth generally agree with IRS data for income, but since the comparison covers 1998 to 2013, (i.e. the second half of Bill's second term, all of W's and five years of Obama's), exactly which policy did we employ during that period?
The one constant I see remains the maturing of the baby boomers. We don't know who compromises which quintile, and I suspect the comoposition of those quintiles changed in 15years. I do know that as my baby boomer generation matured, we as a whole increased our wealth and incomes, so at least some of the greater concentration may reflect the increased incomes and wealth of the largest segment of the population.
Also, the last eight years have featured artificially low interest rates. These tend to inflate the prices of equities and real estate, which would increase the wealth of those already holding those sorts of investments. Those same policies would decrease the value of savings and money market accounts, and decrease the income from those accounts.
For these reasons, I don't find it easy to draw any conclusions about either what we did to bring this about, or what we should do. Without studies that follow individuals, we make more assumptions than conclusions.
John
|
|
Norton
Social climber
|
|
p lu·to·crat
nounderogatory
a person whose power derives from their wealth.
Gary?
so Hillary Clinton's "power" comes from her wealth?
and not from being the preferred Dem Primary voters' choice to face Trump ?
other than being a liar, but less of a liar than Trump, and remember Bernie lies too
what exactly is wrong with Hillary, that she would not sign an increase in the minimum wage if the Republican House actually voted for it?
|
|
Brokedownclimber
Trad climber
Douglas, WY
|
|
They're ALL lying---when their lips are moving.
|
|
Bob D'A
Trad climber
Taos, NM
|
|
To me Hillary's win CA will mirror what happens in the general election. I have been for her and vocal about it, it is now obvious that a lot of people were for her, not just so vocal as Bernie people.
|
|
High Fructose Corn Spirit
Gym climber
|
|
it is now obvious that a lot of people were for her, not just so vocal as Bernie people.
yes
|
|
HighDesertDJ
Trad climber
|
|
John asked I've mulled over the increasing income inequality, and the surveys of increased wealth inequality, without finding easy answers. HDDJ's statistics from the survey of household wealth generally agree with IRS data for income, but since the comparison covers 1998 to 2013, (i.e. the second half of Bill's second term, all of W's and five years of Obama's), exactly which policy did we employ during that period?
Really?
John For these reasons, I don't find it easy to draw any conclusions about either what we did to bring this about, or what we should do. Without studies that follow individuals, we make more assumptions than conclusions.
This is concern trolling, intended or not.
|
|
JEleazarian
Trad climber
Fresno CA
|
|
Really?
John
Yes, really. During that period (1998-2013) we had both Democrats and Republicans as the majority party in Congress, and both Democrats and Republicans occupying the White House. What were the policy constants during that period? Since you imply the solution is to do something different, what might that be, since we've tried a great variety of things?
John
|
|
HighDesertDJ
Trad climber
|
|
I'm not questioning the makeup of the congress, I'm questioning your concern trolling with questions that are easily answered by doing a modicum of reading by any of the prominent scholars on the subject. "I guess it's just a big mystery. We'll never know! Anyway, back to cutting marginal tax rates, predatory banking and hollowing out the social safety net."
-----------------------------------------------------
Remember that time Bernie tacitly excused violence and sexism in the name of democracy?
Take the combative statement after the Nevada showdown.
“I don’t know who advised him that this was the right route to take, but we are now actively destroying what Bernie worked so hard to build over the last year just to pick up two f*#king delegates in a state he lost,” rapid response director Mike Casca complained to Weaver in an internal campaign email obtained by POLITICO.
“Thank you for your views. I’ll relay them to the senator, as he is driving this train,” Weaver wrote back.
Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/06/bernie-sanders-campaign-last-days-224041#ixzz4B0owsAuI
Follow us: @politico on Twitter | Politico on Facebook |
|
Gary
Social climber
Where in the hell is Major Kong?
|
|
Gary?
so Hillary Clinton's "power" comes from her wealth?
Her power comes from serving wealth. You may recall that the Clinton's were big with the New Democrats, and aligning the party more with Wall Street. Away from the New Deal.
plutocracy
noun, plu·toc·ra·cy \plü-ˈtä-krə-sē\
Simple Definition of plutocracy
: government by the richest people
: a country that is ruled by the richest people
: a group of very rich people who have a lot of power
|
|
the Fet
climber
Tu-Tok-A-Nu-La
|
|
As a mainstream dem Hillary serves the plutocracy but also does just enough to not alienate average folks. Trump (and his friends) IS the plutocracy.
Income inequality is the result of many things. Taxes too high on the middle class. Increasing cost of education. Recession which caused wages to stagnate. To help it from getting worse we need to figure out how to tax capital gains at the same rate as income without allowing that money to move offshore or otherwise move under the table, close loopholes which allow corporations to move money offshore, etc. Use the increase in taxes to lower middle class taxes and control the cost of education and improve infrastructure.
I'm not in favor of regulations that disturb free market economics, e.g. Limits on executive compensation, but I am in favor of a progressive tax code becuase the people making the most money are getting the most benefit from our system and they should be paying accordingly. Whereas today many people who make a lot of money in investments pay a lower percentage than people's salary.
I'd rather pay more on my investments and less on salary. Because that would benefit society as a whole.
If everyone is doing well the economy grows and everyone makes more money. But some people are short sighted with greed and don't want to pay enough and everyone Including themselves have less money.
|
|
HighDesertDJ
Trad climber
|
|
Say hello to the next 8 years, motherf*#kers.
|
|
apogee
climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
|
|
Hillary Haterz:
She's the nominee. Get over it.
And now let it go, and focus on the REAL problem.
Trump.
(Or as John amusingly refers to him: 'Chump'.)
|
|
JEleazarian
Trad climber
Fresno CA
|
|
The progressive tax code necessitates special treatment for capital gains. For example, my father-in-law spent 50 years building the value of his business. When he retired, he sold the business, which together with their house, was my inlaws' only real wealth. The sales price represents 50 years worth of effort.
With a flat tax, it doesn't matter if one year's tax exceeds the average, because the rate is the same. With a progressive tax, in contrast, the effective tax can change dramatically. This can either exaggerate or diminish what the true tax should be.
It diminishes what the true tax should be because the tax codes does not recognize income from the increase in the value of the business from year to year. If the tax code recognized that increase as income, the effective net rate of return would diminish.
It exaggerates what the true tax should be because if the increase in value over time were averaged over the fifty years it accumulated, the effective tax rate would be much less because of the progressive nature of income taxes.
While the right argues that capital gains rates are excessive, and the left argues that the rates are too low, I find the current treatment a rational compromise because of the difficulty any other treatment creates. If we try to tax yearly change in value, we have both measurement and liquidity problems. If we treat capital gains the same as ordinary income, we tax what, for many if not most, are once (or at most a few times) in a lifetime events as if they were the taxpayer's annual income. I think these issues overwhelm any problems with the current treatment of capital gains.
John
|
|
Norton
Social climber
|
|
Income Equality
is a result of Capitalism, it is neither good nor bad, it just is
other societies have tried to eliminate inequality, think communism or socialism, both
conceived with the author's good intent to raise the standard of living for the masses
I don't believe America viewes income equality as something to be fixed or eliminated
|
|
JEleazarian
Trad climber
Fresno CA
|
|
(Or as John amusingly refers to him: 'Chump'.)
I didn't do that lightly, either, but his insults and racist rantings caused me to suspend my normal politeness in reference to him. Since he purports to be Christian, I assume he's doing to others as he wants done to him.
John
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!