this will happen to America

#152
#152
Ed12111 said:
Illegal immigration not really. If you remember what this thread is about you'll probably agree that those problems aren't real too.
Click to expand...

well personally I believe that illegal immigration is a bigger problem than income inequality. neither is a sign of a coming apocalypse though

to my original point, I don't believe screaming righties trump up problems any more than screaming lefties. put another way, calling out one side but not the other for exaggerating problems is high on the hypocrisy scale and indicates an inability to understand opposing viewpoints.
 
#153
#153
volinbham said:
well personally I believe that illegal immigration is a bigger problem than income inequality. neither is a sign of a coming apocalypse though

to my original point, I don't believe screaming righties trump up problems any more than screaming lefties. put another way, calling out one side but not the other for exaggerating problems is high on the hypocrisy scale and indicates an inability to understand opposing viewpoints.
Click to expand...

still haven't seen the income inequality problem explanation. I understand that it's a perfect, albeit worthless, political platform for garnering votes from the masses, but where's the actual problem?
 
#154
#154
volinbham said:
well personally I believe that illegal immigration is a bigger problem than income inequality. neither is a sign of a coming apocalypse though

to my original point, I don't believe screaming righties trump up problems any more than screaming lefties. put another way, calling out one side but not the other for exaggerating problems is high on the hypocrisy scale and indicates an inability to understand opposing viewpoints.
Click to expand...

Did you read the thread? The issues being trumpeted were the libruls destroying the country, so I need to buy seeds now. I believe history has shown that income inequality is a bad thing and believe global warming is a serious issue. Also, I'm not the least bit concerned about immigrants, so i'm not the least bit hypocritical for saying one's sides issues are more real than the other.
 
#155
#155
BigPapaVol said:
still haven't seen the income inequality problem explanation. I understand that it's a perfect, albeit worthless, political platform for garnering votes from the masses, but where's the actual problem?
Click to expand...

This seems to be your favorite issue. Name one country that has benefited from income inequality. I can name a few that were weakened or destroyed by it. Banana Republics are not model governments this should be obvious.
 
#156
#156
Ed12111 said:
Did you read the thread?

As always, yes

The issues being trumpeted were the libruls destroying the country, so I need to buy seeds now. I believe history has shown that income inequality is a bad thing and believe global warming is a serious issue. Also, I'm not the least bit concerned about immigrants, so i'm not the least bit hypocritical for saying one's sides issues are more real than the other.
Click to expand...

.
 
#157
#157
Ed12111 said:
This seems to be your favorite issue. Name one country that has benefited from income inequality. I can name a few that were weakened or destroyed by it. Banana Republics are not model governments this should be obvious.
Click to expand...

I'd say America has done just fine with income inequality. So well, in fact, that China is absolutely changing its world by selling into our problematic economic machine. I like that your issue is the problem and you asked me to show where it has helped, rather than providing your laughable list of countries it has destroyed.

It sounds cute to point to the unfairness of it all, but it's not the problem you pretend. In fact, I'm going to laugh at your explanation of those destroyed by income inequality, but am sitting here with bated breath, seeing as how your father is a professor and all.
 
#158
#158
Ed12111 said:
This seems to be your favorite issue. Name one country that has benefited from income inequality. I can name a few that were weakened or destroyed by it. Banana Republics are not model governments this should be obvious.
Click to expand...

Benefitting from and being a serious problem are distinct issues.

Is perfect income equality the preferred situation? Is there evidence to support that?

That gets us back to the "severity" issue. Is extreme income inequality (eg. Banana Republic) a good thing? Probably not. Is the current level of income inequality a major problem in the US? Haven't seen any proof that it is.

Oddly enough, illegal immigration is increasing the income inequality in the US yet you see one as a problem and one as no problem.
 
#159
#159
Ed12111 said:
Did you read the thread? The issues being trumpeted were the libruls destroying the country, so I need to buy seeds now. I believe history has shown that
income inequality​
is a bad thing and believe global warming is a serious issue. Also, I'm not the least bit concerned about immigrants, so i'm not the least bit hypocritical for saying one's sides issues are more real than the other.
Click to expand...

Ed12111 said:
This seems to be your favorite issue. Name one country that has benefited from income inequality. I can name a few that were weakened or destroyed by it. Banana Republics are not model governments this should be obvious.
Click to expand...
I have seen that pitched around here a lot lately (by different posters) what is your definition of that?
 
#160
#160
volinbham said:
Benefitting from and being a serious problem are distinct issues.

Is perfect income equality the preferred situation? Is there evidence to support that?

That gets us back to the "severity" issue. Is extreme income inequality (eg. Banana Republic) a good thing? Probably not. Is the current level of income inequality a major problem in the US? Haven't seen any proof that it is.

Oddly enough, illegal immigration is increasing the income inequality in the US yet you see one as a problem and one as no problem.
Click to expand...

taken to the extreme, it's potentially a problem, but that isn't possible in a society and economy like ours, unless the government becomes the economic power that it's trying to become today.
 
#162
#162
BigPapaVol said:
taken to the extreme, it's potentially a problem, but that isn't possible in a society and economy like ours, unless the government becomes the economic power that it's trying to become today.
Click to expand...

I like how it's "potentially" a problem when taken to the extreme.
 
#163
#163
BeecherVol said:
I have seen that pitched around here a lot lately (by different posters) what is your definition of that?
Click to expand...

When the top 1% controls more than the bottom 24% of the country it's a problem. As to BigPapaVol's laughable assertion that income inequality is irrelevant. The guy should study the history of his country a little better. Maybe even run a correlation between a happiness index and income inequality throughout the world. Hint: it matters a lot.
 
#165
#165
volinbham said:
Benefitting from and being a serious problem are distinct issues.

Is perfect income equality the preferred situation? Is there evidence to support that?

That gets us back to the "severity" issue. Is extreme income inequality (eg. Banana Republic) a good thing? Probably not. Is the current level of income inequality a major problem in the US? Haven't seen any proof that it is.

Oddly enough, illegal immigration is increasing the income inequality in the US yet you see one as a problem and one as no problem.
Click to expand...

I wonder at what point do you think income inequality becomes too much. You certainly aren't basing it on historical levels. Does the top 5% need to have 99.9% of the money for it to be a problem? From 1980-2005 more than 80% of the nation's increase in wealth went to the top 1%. If one doesn't see that as a problem you really have to wonder when it does become a problem.
 
#167
#167
Ed12111 said:
I wonder at what point do you think income inequality becomes too much. You certainly aren't basing it on historical levels. Does the top 5% need to have 99.9% of the money for it to be a problem? From 1980-2005 more than 80% of the nation's increase in wealth went to the top 1%. If one doesn't see that as a problem you really have to wonder when it does become a problem.
Click to expand...

I don't know when it becomes a severe problem. I understand the problems associated with the phenomena at the extreme but don't believe it is currently a major problem in the US.
 
#168
#168
At what point does a business owner decide that the risk of have 40 employees instead of 20 is not worth the hassle?

Does that create a labor problem at some point?
 
#169
#169
volinbham said:
I don't know when it becomes a severe problem. I understand the problems associated with the phenomena at the extreme but don't believe it is currently a major problem in the US.
Click to expand...

I don't know when it becomes a severe problem, but why do we have to wait for that. I'm not sure what severe means. Riots in the streets? Just strikes me as bizarre that people would so vehemently oppose the slightest increase in taxes for the top 1% when they've gained 80% of the wealth because it's not a "severe" problem. And the sheer joy some people seem to get out of others believing it's a problem is bizarre.
 
#170
#170
BeecherVol said:
At what point does a business owner decide that the risk of have 40 employees instead of 20 is not worth the hassle?

Does that create a labor problem at some point?
Click to expand...

If that's the concern, we aren't anywhere even in the ballpark of that happening. No one is going to stop accumulating wealth because their take home profit over 250,000 is gonna be taxed 5% more than before.
 
#171
#171
Ed12111 said:
If that's the concern, we aren't anywhere even in the ballpark of that happening. No one is going to stop accumulating wealth because their take home profit over 250,000 is gonna be taxed 5% more than before.
Click to expand...

Will that achieve equality?

Or will it just raise the % for what the top 1% pays in the total federal taxes collected.
 
#172
#172
BeecherVol said:
Will that achieve equality?

Or will it just raise the % for what the top 1% pays in the total federal taxes collected.
Click to expand...

Will it achieve equality? No. Raising the taxes on income over 250,000 will not achieve equality, but it will ever so slightly decrease inequality. The fact that it is such a small little dent in the wealth of the top 1% shows how absurd it is to cry about how unfair it is.
 
#173
#173
Ed12111 said:
Will it achieve equality? No. Raising the taxes on income over 250,000 will not achieve equality, but it will ever so slightly decrease inequality. The fact that it is such a small little dent in the wealth of the top 1% shows how absurd it is to cry about how unfair it is.
Click to expand...

What does achieve it?
 
#175
#175
Ed12111 said:
I wonder at what point do you think income inequality becomes too much. You certainly aren't basing it on historical levels. Does the top 5% need to have 99.9% of the money for it to be a problem? From 1980-2005 more than 80% of the nation's increase in wealth went to the top 1%. If one doesn't see that as a problem you really have to wonder when it does become a problem.
Click to expand...

What is your solution that does not involve a simple transfer of power from one corrupt group to another? I trust powerful politicians that had nothing to do with the creation of the wealth they control far less than this 1% who actually DID have something to do with growing the national economy.

Notably during the time period you cite... big gov't came into full flower. The programs of the 60's and 70's that were supposed to eliminate poverty were firmly entrenched. Debt and deficits which were the DIRECT PRODUCT OF LIBERAL/PROGRESSIVE IDEAS ballooned.

I think you do cite a legitimate problem... but your solution has utterly failed. Gov't needs to be the referee... not a participant in the wrestling match for power.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top