|
Post by lakhota on Jun 15, 2011 0:04:27 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by lakhota on Jun 15, 2011 0:35:55 GMT -5
Nation's Poorest 1% Now Controls Two-Thirds Of U.S. Soda Can WealthWASHINGTON—A report on growing disparities in the concentration of U.S. aluminum-can wealth, released Tuesday by the Department of Commerce, revealed that 66 percent of the nation's recyclable assets are now held by the poorest 1 percent of the population. According to the sobering report, the disproportionate distribution of soda-can wealth is greater than ever before, and has become one of the worst instances of economic inequality in the nation's history. Data showed that over-salvaging of cans by a small and elite group of can-horders has created a steadily growing and possibly unbridgeable gap between the rich and the mega-poor. "Although our nation's upper middle class actually consumes the most beverages, a staggering percentage of these cans wind up in the hands of a very few," said economist Cynthia Pierce, who worked as a consultant on the three-year, $14 million government study. "It's a troubling trend. And as a tiny fraction of the population continues to maintain its stranglehold on redeemable can wealth, it's a trend that shows no sign of slowing." According to Pierce, the study points to a distinct economic advantage for the most can-affluent—those who possess the resources necessary to collect, transport, separate, and accumulate more and more cans than the rest of the population. More: www.theonion.com/articles/nations-poorest-1-now-controls-twothirds-of-us-sod,2456/
|
|
|
Post by youngmindoldframe on Jun 15, 2011 4:29:40 GMT -5
Nation's Poorest 1% Now Controls Two-Thirds Of U.S. Soda Can WealthWASHINGTON—A report on growing disparities in the concentration of U.S. aluminum-can wealth, released Tuesday by the Department of Commerce, revealed that 66 percent of the nation's recyclable assets are now held by the poorest 1 percent of the population. According to the sobering report, the disproportionate distribution of soda-can wealth is greater than ever before, and has become one of the worst instances of economic inequality in the nation's history. Data showed that over-salvaging of cans by a small and elite group of can-horders has created a steadily growing and possibly unbridgeable gap between the rich and the mega-poor. "Although our nation's upper middle class actually consumes the most beverages, a staggering percentage of these cans wind up in the hands of a very few," said economist Cynthia Pierce, who worked as a consultant on the three-year, $14 million government study. "It's a troubling trend. And as a tiny fraction of the population continues to maintain its stranglehold on redeemable can wealth, it's a trend that shows no sign of slowing." According to Pierce, the study points to a distinct economic advantage for the most can-affluent—those who possess the resources necessary to collect, transport, separate, and accumulate more and more cans than the rest of the population. More: www.theonion.com/articles/nations-poorest-1-now-controls-twothirds-of-us-sod,2456/ That’s rich.
|
|
Politically_Incorrect12
Senior Member
With a little faith, we can move a mountain; with a little help, we can change the world.
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 20:42:13 GMT -5
Posts: 3,763
|
Post by Politically_Incorrect12 on Jun 15, 2011 4:42:13 GMT -5
What's it going to take to get it back?? That's easy, it's going to take people not spending everything they have and starting to save. While it definitely doesn't guarantee you'll be wealthy, just whining how the "wealthy have all the money and I should have some of it" won't get you anywhere either...or at least I hope it won't.
|
|
floridayankee
Junior Associate
If You Don't Stand Behind Our Troops, Feel Free to Stand in Front of Them.
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 14:56:05 GMT -5
Posts: 7,461
|
Post by floridayankee on Jun 15, 2011 6:36:12 GMT -5
The Richest 1% Have Captured America's Wealth -- What's It Going to Take to Get It Back? Get off the couch?
|
|
cme1201
Junior Associate
Tennis Elbow, Jock Itch, and Athletes Foot, every man has a sports life!
Joined: Apr 6, 2011 13:55:07 GMT -5
Posts: 5,503
|
Post by cme1201 on Jun 15, 2011 6:39:13 GMT -5
The Richest 1% Have Captured America's Wealth -- What's It Going to Take to Get It Back?
People working on keeping and not spending all the money they accumulate. People with a work ethic willing to put in the hours to earn what they want.
|
|
floridayankee
Junior Associate
If You Don't Stand Behind Our Troops, Feel Free to Stand in Front of Them.
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 14:56:05 GMT -5
Posts: 7,461
|
Post by floridayankee on Jun 15, 2011 6:39:28 GMT -5
As much as I am a Democrat..... We all figured that out already. You made a terrible conservative troll BTW. Better brush up on your rules for radicals and learn to blend a little better.
|
|
floridayankee
Junior Associate
If You Don't Stand Behind Our Troops, Feel Free to Stand in Front of Them.
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 14:56:05 GMT -5
Posts: 7,461
|
Post by floridayankee on Jun 15, 2011 7:30:03 GMT -5
I still don't get why so many of you conservatives look down on the working poor or worse pass laws kicking their asses even harder. Conservatives don't look down on the working poor....that's just clap trap that your liberal masters want you to believe. Good grief....yeah, that must be it. Oh how little you know. Maybe some of us learned the difference between a hand up and a hand out. Maybe some of us realize through experience that you can only help so much and the rest is up to the individual.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 11, 2024 1:24:20 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 15, 2011 10:08:41 GMT -5
Like I said before, I believe tax and income redistribution is a far more effective way. So....if you tax and redistribute, where is the incentive to be better than the next guy? One of the things that makes this country great, is that if you really bust your ass, and do it better than the next guy, you will be compensated for your effort That applies towards business or employees When you start taking away the reason to be successful, you begin on the road to socialism/communism Where is the incentive to open the new business when i know the government wants to take 50, 60, 70% of my new gains and give them to someone who really didnt work as hard as i did to get to where i am....i put in all the work, and risk my capital, for someone else to take the majority of the gains I dont think so.....and nor will the majority of business owners....who by the way are the people that provide the jobs this country sorely needs
|
|
NoMoreLunacy
Well-Known Member
Joined: Jun 8, 2011 23:21:57 GMT -5
Posts: 1,293
|
Post by NoMoreLunacy on Jun 15, 2011 10:27:29 GMT -5
What was the incentive for people in the 50's when the top tax rate was in the 90 percents?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 11, 2024 1:24:20 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 15, 2011 10:41:14 GMT -5
The world was a far different place in the 1950's
Travel was not as easy or fast
There were countries and sections of continents that you wouldnt want to visit, much less live there
There are still some areas people will NOT travel to, but they are the exception, not the norm
With standards of living rising all over the globe.....there are many desirable choices available now that were not there 60 years ago
|
|
NoMoreLunacy
Well-Known Member
Joined: Jun 8, 2011 23:21:57 GMT -5
Posts: 1,293
|
Post by NoMoreLunacy on Jun 15, 2011 10:55:26 GMT -5
I don't get your point. What does travel have to do with taxes?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 11, 2024 1:24:20 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 15, 2011 11:10:48 GMT -5
I don't get your point. What does travel have to do with taxes? Choices.... That simple..... People have choices now, that were not available to them in the 50's How many in 1950 would ever consider leaving the US for foreign soil? How many are leaving now? How many are considering it? You can raise taxes.....but understand that people have choices now, that 60 years ago they NEVER would have considered
|
|
NoMoreLunacy
Well-Known Member
Joined: Jun 8, 2011 23:21:57 GMT -5
Posts: 1,293
|
Post by NoMoreLunacy on Jun 15, 2011 11:40:21 GMT -5
How would traveling lower your taxes? As an US citizen you pay taxes on your income regardless of where you live.
|
|
NoMoreLunacy
Well-Known Member
Joined: Jun 8, 2011 23:21:57 GMT -5
Posts: 1,293
|
Post by NoMoreLunacy on Jun 15, 2011 11:41:38 GMT -5
And frankly, if Americans think they can go overseas and live in Europe and Asia and pay lower taxes, they have another thing coming. USA has one of the lowest taxes in the world among developed countries. You want to go live in Pakistan where 2% of the population pays taxes? Be my guest.
|
|
jkapp
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 23, 2010 12:05:08 GMT -5
Posts: 5,416
|
Post by jkapp on Jun 15, 2011 12:02:52 GMT -5
What was the incentive for people in the 50's when the top tax rate was in the 90 percents? Back then, being on welfare or the government dole was seen as something to be ashamed of... And a living wage is bullshit...through the years I have seen the same people who were living paycheck to paycheck on $20,000 a year are now living paycheck to paycheck in $50,000 a year. It is not up to the employer to pay you what you feel you need to live on, it is up to to you to live on the wage the employer pays you...it's called RESPONSIBILITY. I know, big,scary word, eh, liberals???
|
|
NoMoreLunacy
Well-Known Member
Joined: Jun 8, 2011 23:21:57 GMT -5
Posts: 1,293
|
Post by NoMoreLunacy on Jun 15, 2011 12:07:32 GMT -5
What was the incentive for people in the 50's when the top tax rate was in the 90 percents? Back then, being on welfare or the government dole was seen as something to be ashamed of... And a living wage is bullshit...through the years I have seen the same people who were living paycheck to paycheck on $20,000 a year are now living paycheck to paycheck in $50,000 a year. It is not up to the employer to pay you what you feel you need to live on, it is up to to you to live on the wage the employer pays you...it's called RESPONSIBILITY. I know, big,scary word, eh, liberals??? Over the years I have seen corporations pay living wages and make a handsome profit, and then pay subsistence wages and make a handsome profit. It is not the responsibility of workers to take subsistence wages to enable corporations to make a profit. It is the responsibility of corporations to make a profit while paying workers a living wage. That's called responsibility. Big scary word, eh, conservatives?
|
|
cme1201
Junior Associate
Tennis Elbow, Jock Itch, and Athletes Foot, every man has a sports life!
Joined: Apr 6, 2011 13:55:07 GMT -5
Posts: 5,503
|
Post by cme1201 on Jun 15, 2011 12:10:31 GMT -5
Again I ask for the 101st time, What monetary value is a living wage?
What should a burger flipper at McDonald's Make? What should the bus boy at your local resturant make? What should the cashier who rings up your groceries make? What Dollar amount is it?
|
|
NoMoreLunacy
Well-Known Member
Joined: Jun 8, 2011 23:21:57 GMT -5
Posts: 1,293
|
Post by NoMoreLunacy on Jun 15, 2011 12:17:56 GMT -5
Again I ask for the 101st time, What monetary value is a living wage? What should a burger flipper at McDonald's Make? What should the bus boy at your local resturant make? What should the cashier who rings up your groceries make? What Dollar amount is it? I think a burger flipper should make what the prevailing market provides. But there should be a huge social safety net such that the burger flipper has access to very, very cheap and high-quality housing, food, child care, education (not just K-12, at all levels), medical care, transportation, recreational facilities, enrichment programs, job training, unemployment benefits et cetra. I would fund that by taxing the rich.
|
|
jkapp
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 23, 2010 12:05:08 GMT -5
Posts: 5,416
|
Post by jkapp on Jun 15, 2011 12:24:40 GMT -5
Back then, being on welfare or the government dole was seen as something to be ashamed of... And a living wage is bullshit...through the years I have seen the same people who were living paycheck to paycheck on $20,000 a year are now living paycheck to paycheck in $50,000 a year. It is not up to the employer to pay you what you feel you need to live on, it is up to to you to live on the wage the employer pays you...it's called RESPONSIBILITY. I know, big,scary word, eh, liberals??? Over the years I have seen corporations pay living wages and make a handsome profit, and then pay subsistence wages and make a handsome profit. It is not the responsibility of workers to take subsistence wages to enable corporations to make a profit. It is the responsibility of corporations to make a profit while paying workers a living wage. That's called responsibility. Big scary word, eh, conservatives? And as I stated before - I see the same people living paycheck to paycheck on $50k just as they wer eon $20k...you can't force people to become responsible by paying them more - that's why the responsible part needs to come from the WORKER. The company offers a job and a wage - if there is a job and it pays that wage, then the company has fulfilled its responsibility If someone accepts that job then it is a fair wage. Now it is up the person who accepted it to make it a living wage for them. That's their R-E-S-P-O-N-S-I-B-I-L-I-T-Y.
|
|
NoMoreLunacy
Well-Known Member
Joined: Jun 8, 2011 23:21:57 GMT -5
Posts: 1,293
|
Post by NoMoreLunacy on Jun 15, 2011 12:28:12 GMT -5
Well, when workers form an union and offer their labor for a certain wage, they have fulfilled their responsibility. It a company accepts that wage - high as it may be - it is up to the company to make sure that it earns a profit while bearing the burden of that wage. That their responsibility. You can't make companies responsible, I have seen companies do fine ith high wages in the past who are now struggling even with low wages.
By the way, I don;t believe a word of the above. I am just mirroring your argument so that you can see how ridiculous it is.
|
|
cme1201
Junior Associate
Tennis Elbow, Jock Itch, and Athletes Foot, every man has a sports life!
Joined: Apr 6, 2011 13:55:07 GMT -5
Posts: 5,503
|
Post by cme1201 on Jun 15, 2011 12:28:39 GMT -5
Again I ask for the 101st time, What monetary value is a living wage? What should a burger flipper at McDonald's Make? What should the bus boy at your local restaurant make? What should the cashier who rings up your groceries make? What Dollar amount is it? I think a burger flipper should make what the prevailing market provides. But there should be a huge social safety net such that the burger flipper has access to very, very cheap and high-quality housing, food, education (not just K-12, at all levels), medical care, transportation, recreational facilities, et cetra. I would fund that by taxing the rich. So once again you can not give me a monetary figure. This circular argument is 1. weak and 2. tiresome. I want the poor to have a living wage (yet I can not give a monetary figure to what said wage is). They should have the ability to buy homes (whether they can afford them or not), and I want to fund all of this off the backs of those who Provide the jobs that are to give the living wages that I can't define. Come back when you have a rational statement to make please.
|
|
NoMoreLunacy
Well-Known Member
Joined: Jun 8, 2011 23:21:57 GMT -5
Posts: 1,293
|
Post by NoMoreLunacy on Jun 15, 2011 12:30:40 GMT -5
I think a burger flipper should make what the prevailing market provides. But there should be a huge social safety net such that the burger flipper has access to very, very cheap and high-quality housing, food, education (not just K-12, at all levels), medical care, transportation, recreational facilities, et cetra. I would fund that by taxing the rich. So once again you can not give me a monetary figure. This circular argument is 1. weak and 2. tiresome. I want the poor to have a living wage (yet I can not give a monetary figure to what said wage is). They should have the ability to buy homes (whether they can afford them or not), and I want to fund all of this off the backs of those who Provide the jobs that are to give the living wages that I can't define. Come back when you have a rational statement to make please. I gave you a monetary figure - whatever the market bears. I don't want the poor to have a living wage. I want the labor market to determine the wage. I don't even believe in minimum wage. However I believe in huge social safety nets like in Europe which is an income redistribution mechanism through progressive taxation.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 11, 2024 1:24:20 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 15, 2011 12:33:24 GMT -5
Again I ask for the 101st time, What monetary value is a living wage?
What should a burger flipper at McDonald's Make? What should the bus boy at your local restaurant make? What should the cashier who rings up your groceries make? What Dollar amount is it?
cme1201, I'm telling you that you won't get a number from a liberal. I tried on the thread about the guy wanting a raise after 8 years (& they were protesting to a company that he didn't even work for).
They (liberals) wouldn't even say what they would be paying the guy now. They did say that he deserved a raise for being a loyal worker, working hard, always being on time, etc even though none of that was in the article the thread was based on. One of the liberals turned the question around to me (common liberal tactic) & asked me to fill in the pay. I was able to do that withing 30 seconds of reading the question. Now that doesn't get me bragging rights because anyone that thinks with their head instead of their heart could have done the same thing, yet no liberal was able to do it.
My guess is that liberals learned young to be vague or fuzzy on their ideas. They probably spouted off to co workers or family with those ideas when they were young & did supply numbers. That would have opened them up to ridicule because the numbers just wouldn't add up or didn't make sense. In other words the same thing that blew up in their faces years ago taught them never to do it again. It's just easier to attack someone on their beliefs rather than defend your beliefs when numbers prove you wrong.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 11, 2024 1:24:20 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 15, 2011 12:36:52 GMT -5
I gave you a monetary figure - whatever the market bears.
Sorry NoMoreLunacy but that's a cop out at best. One could say that if someone was hired for a job whatever the pay is would be "whatever the market bears" & that is unexceptable to liberals. They want a "living wage" to be paid & I too would like to know that that is? Name a number & let the conservative here show you why it won't work. Take the dare, come on......
|
|
NoMoreLunacy
Well-Known Member
Joined: Jun 8, 2011 23:21:57 GMT -5
Posts: 1,293
|
Post by NoMoreLunacy on Jun 15, 2011 12:43:02 GMT -5
I gave you a monetary figure - whatever the market bears. Sorry NoMoreLunacy but that's a cop out at best. One could say that if someone was hired for a job whatever the pay is would be "whatever the market bears" & that is unexceptable to liberals. They want a "living wage" to be paid & I too would like to know that that is? Name a number & let the conservative here show you why it won't work. Take the dare, come on...... I already told you that I do not believe in a living wage nor in a minimum wage. Why are you asking me? I believe in social safety nets paid out of taxes on the rich.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 11, 2024 1:24:20 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 15, 2011 13:09:21 GMT -5
Take your meds and get some rest, oldtex. I probably haven't used the "pubs" abbreviation near 30 times the entire time I've been on this board, let alone "30 to 40 times per day". I sense some hidden hostility...
You use it in just about every attack post or comment & so does Warsaw. No hidden hostility, when I have hostility it's right out front. We just have totally opposite views & while I'll argue with you here, I don't personally know you so no personal dislike.
BTW, I have NEVER used "pugs" as you stated (unless it was a typo). Are you sure you don't have me confused with another poster?
Only kind of a typo, but that's not what I typed. The other day I guess they were working on the system. Every post that I made in about a 15 minute span came out with either garbage or something that I didn't type. I corrected some of them but must have missed that one.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 11, 2024 1:24:20 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 15, 2011 13:11:09 GMT -5
I already told you that I do not believe in a living wage nor in a minimum wage. Why are you asking me?
Sorry I didn't look up who cme asked the question of & from your post, I thought it was you.
|
|
NoMoreLunacy
Well-Known Member
Joined: Jun 8, 2011 23:21:57 GMT -5
Posts: 1,293
|
Post by NoMoreLunacy on Jun 15, 2011 13:24:59 GMT -5
I already told you that I do not believe in a living wage nor in a minimum wage. Why are you asking me? Sorry I didn't look up who cme asked the question of & from your post, I thought it was you. I am a tax and redistribute liberal. However I make my money off of the business world, and it is a VERY comfortable living, so I am not about to saw off the branch I am sitting on. I have no problem with higher taxes though. I can always earn more money and increase my after tax income. Frankly, if the social conservatives didn't dominate the Republican PArty, I would be considered a moderate Republican. I lean super left on social issues, and moderate on fiscal issues (moderate as in standard accepted moderate across the globe and in the standard economics, not how the Republicans would define it for whom the only right tax rate for the rich is 0%). You can call me a Clinton democrat. Or a DINO.
|
|
jkapp
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 23, 2010 12:05:08 GMT -5
Posts: 5,416
|
Post by jkapp on Jun 15, 2011 17:58:08 GMT -5
Well, when workers form an union and offer their labor for a certain wage, they have fulfilled their responsibility. It a company accepts that wage - high as it may be - it is up to the company to make sure that it earns a profit while bearing the burden of that wage. That their responsibility. You can't make companies responsible, I have seen companies do fine ith high wages in the past who are now struggling even with low wages. By the way, I don;t believe a word of the above. I am just mirroring your argument so that you can see how ridiculous it is. So you're saying people do not have the responsibility to live within the wage they accepted? Well, there might be an issue right there... And the union thing is a fun little play on my previous post, but with unions now protesting and suing the government (and businesses) from being responsible and declining their wage/benefit offers, I'd say that your response is pretty poor.
|
|