No, the graph is just misleading and seems to want to imply that rates on the rich have been trending upwards.
Fair Share?
- Thread starter Gameface
- Start date
No, the graph is just misleading and seems to want to imply that rates on the rich have been trending upwards.
MoreFeasts
Member
As usual, you've got me fired up, even though I have no idea what you are saying.
HeavenHarris
Banned
i stand with moe.
UGLI baby
Well-Known Member
Charlie Muldoon
New Member
my teachers Learned me about the Important social issues like this one.
PearlWatson
Well-Known Member
Wealth inequality probably matches effort inequality.
SaltyDawg
Well-Known Member
Yeah, only 1% of the country works hard. /sarcasm
The average worker at a corporation has to work over a month to earn what the CEO makes in an hour. These are people who go to work everyday, not lazy, good for nothing, freeloaders, just looking for a handout.
That's the average worker's salary. The lowest paid worker's salary in a corporation is obviously even less.
MoreFeasts
Member
Salty, I think that video is probably off. I would think that the wealth held by the bottom 20% is actually a negative number. They are not counting some debt I'll bet.
There's plenty of discussion about what constitutes wealth and how to ever measure it again. For example, the portion captured at the top works more hours while those in the bottom half have seen vacation time consistently move up since 1980. Not to mention how richer people tend to immerse themselves into their business and are always working mentally when they're off the clock.
On the flip side, many factory workers choose this life instead of applying themselves by going to college. Not to disparage factory work by any means, I've done plenty myself, but it's often the easy route for young folks to take. None of my good friends from the factory in the same situation as me went to school when I did while working there. They partied instead. They don't cry about their chosen path through life either.
SaltyDawg
Well-Known Member
Do they need to work more than a month to earn what you make in an hour?
We're not talking about factory workers going to school to become upper middle class here. If you watch that video you'll see the top 1% is far ahead of even the next 5%.
When they say the average worker has to work more than a month to earn what the CEO makes in an hour, they spell out that they aren't talking about the janitor or the lowest paid employees, they're talking about the average salary. So that average salary likely has your salary (or others in your position) factored in.
I get it that if you go to school and work hard you can do pretty well for yourself. But as the video shows, that's not what I'm talking about.
The difference between your wealth and a factory worker's would have to be ridiculous for it to be as drastic as the video shows.
SaltyDawg
Well-Known Member
I'm just saying that pointing out how your factory worker friends could easily be in your position (if they worked as hard as you) is counter productive in the grand scheme of things.
The reality is you're probably much closer to the salary of those factory worker friends of yours than you are to the CEO's salary at the same factory. And I doubt the CEO worked that much harder than you to get there.
The Thriller
Well-Known Member
First of all... What factory workers? Does the USA still have factories? Where?
Secondly, we have a record # of college grads right now. They're one of the worst off financially right now. No jobs and tons of debt. And it's not like this is something "weird" or "unusual." We've been trending this way for quite some time. Welcome to the 20th and 21st centuries where education actually matters. For a long time more and more degrees have been handed out.
Interestingly enough, as # of degrees handed out has increased the income gap has increased, and middle-class salaries have stagnated. So I don't think that Americans being "lazy asses" is very relevant to this discussion... Certainly not as relevant as the discussion of the tax structure and benefits being slanted in favor of the rich.
Which brings us to the next discussion...
Look at how rates have fallen since the 50s:
Now if lower rates meant more growth and higher rates meant less growth, then how do repubs explain this???
To quickly answer the author's question...
When will they be paying their fair share? Once marginal tax rates are what back to what they were in the 50s and early 60s. Which, should be awesome to repubs!
They seem to have a love affair with the 50s. When premarital, homosexual, and interracial sex never happened, kids were respectful, America was awesome, everyone flew their flags, NO EPA was around to prevent companies from polluting water and air, women were modest, and everybody knew your name.
The Thriller
Well-Known Member
If the key to fixing our economy is to pump out my college grads then why are repubs looking at cuts to Pell Grants and subsidized loans? What the hell is NCLB doing to help? Why are repubs so against Obama extending the extension of being able to stay on parent health insurance? Don't they want kids to focus on the education so they can obtain the highest level of edu possible? How can this happen if they have to worry about insurance?
My friend is a great example. A fantastic teacher. Unfortunately, he cannot afford to student teach (and an internship lasts for an entire year and doesn't pay the bills. Internships here in Utah= half pay no benefits of a 1st year teacher. That would land you somewhere between $12-15 grand THE ENTIRE YEAR. Wheras student teaching is ZERO pay for essentially a semester of teaching).
Blame him for being a lazy *** and not graduating with a college degree but stalling out one semester short in order to continue to work full time at his job as a teller at a bank?
Blame the edu system for not having talented or motivated teachers? This guy is extremely talented and motivated... But just can't afford to take the hit for a sem/year.
Blame him for getting married and having a kid? But but but... repubs hate sex edu and birth control!!!
What a situation!
So we have enough money to spend decades in Iraq and Afghanistan, chasing ghosts of WMDs, and spending 4x as much as China and 8x as much as Russia in defense... Yet... We don't have enough money to sufficiently fund our educational system?
How does that make ANY sense?
Why are states cutting education? Utah in particular. What the hell??? How long as we going to be dead last in per-pupil spending? How many days was it debated their ridiculous concealed weapons permit nonsense bills compared to education funding?
My friend is a great example. A fantastic teacher. Unfortunately, he cannot afford to student teach (and an internship lasts for an entire year and doesn't pay the bills. Internships here in Utah= half pay no benefits of a 1st year teacher. That would land you somewhere between $12-15 grand THE ENTIRE YEAR. Wheras student teaching is ZERO pay for essentially a semester of teaching).
Blame him for being a lazy *** and not graduating with a college degree but stalling out one semester short in order to continue to work full time at his job as a teller at a bank?
Blame the edu system for not having talented or motivated teachers? This guy is extremely talented and motivated... But just can't afford to take the hit for a sem/year.
Blame him for getting married and having a kid? But but but... repubs hate sex edu and birth control!!!
What a situation!
So we have enough money to spend decades in Iraq and Afghanistan, chasing ghosts of WMDs, and spending 4x as much as China and 8x as much as Russia in defense... Yet... We don't have enough money to sufficiently fund our educational system?
How does that make ANY sense?
Why are states cutting education? Utah in particular. What the hell??? How long as we going to be dead last in per-pupil spending? How many days was it debated their ridiculous concealed weapons permit nonsense bills compared to education funding?
Last edited:
The Thriller
Well-Known Member
Simple question...
Why can't capital gains ever be mentioned?
Foxnews pundits always bring up this income tax gap yet seem silent when it comes to capital gains. Why?
Do they not want to mention that the largest source of the upper bracket's income isn't "income" but returns on capital gains? Why can't we lose these loopholes? Why should Mitters pay less on capital gains than I do on income? C'mon man, show some patriotism!
Also, why don't we take into consideration that there will always be poor/poorer people who won't pay income taxes? This was the case in 1950 and is the case in 2013. Their taxes haven't changed much. But those in the upper brackets? Have seen a complete revolution when it comes to their taxes.
Why?
Why can't capital gains ever be mentioned?
Foxnews pundits always bring up this income tax gap yet seem silent when it comes to capital gains. Why?
Do they not want to mention that the largest source of the upper bracket's income isn't "income" but returns on capital gains? Why can't we lose these loopholes? Why should Mitters pay less on capital gains than I do on income? C'mon man, show some patriotism!
Also, why don't we take into consideration that there will always be poor/poorer people who won't pay income taxes? This was the case in 1950 and is the case in 2013. Their taxes haven't changed much. But those in the upper brackets? Have seen a complete revolution when it comes to their taxes.
Why?
Last edited:
The Thriller
Well-Known Member
Dwight D Eisenhower
How far we have fallen.
Understood and we probably agree in the grand scheme of things. I am skeptical, however, on fostering an easy-life environment that seems to be so well taken advantage of these days. I know very few people, including myself, who grow to their full potential after hitting their comfort zone, or even well before. Putting in the mental effort and diligence that the vast majority of rich people do is one possibility that many of us refuse to devote ourselves to. Instead, we seem content living a fat and happy lifestyle until an early retirement where we become a ward of the government and contribute to sucking the middle class dry while feeding the wealth divide.