|
Post by Mkitty is pro kitty on Mar 5, 2011 21:53:48 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by privateinvestor on Mar 6, 2011 8:05:26 GMT -5
Re: The wealth redistribution ideals of the far left
Was this theory of wealth redistribution soundly defeated last fall?? Even Obama caved in on eliminating the Bush tax cuts for the so called wealthy so maybe his idea is about to be tossed on the trash heap with other socialistic ideas from the Far Left..
|
|
ameiko
Familiar Member
Joined: Jan 16, 2011 10:48:22 GMT -5
Posts: 812
|
Post by ameiko on Mar 6, 2011 10:47:03 GMT -5
...okay... then I would question your response... because how does the family living within their means "contribute" to the overall consumption problem of a community? I can certainly see where the family who lives beyond their means does... ...you say the two are compatible... but how are they? I have already explained myself. ALso, your above words do not coincide what what you wrote earlier. Perhaps there is a failure to communicate with us. Trying to explain again: 1. you state that people have raised their expectations of what it means to be middle class (more cars, bigger house, etc..) and thus it costs more money. This need for more money thus makes it seems as if the middle class is out of reach. I do not take issue with this and even agree to a certain extent. THAT SAID: 2. House and education costs have increased at a rate far exceeding inflation. A great deal of this is due to women entering the workplace (more supply of labor decreases wages) and these new two income families using their increase salaries to bid up housing and education (see The Two Income Trap). Due to the above, it has become more the norm that two income earners are required to buy what once one income earner could. That 1300 sq ft home that you mentioned that was once considered enough for middle class? Well now instead of one blue collar worker able to own it, now the above edges towards the necessity of two income earners because those two income families bid it up because they like the neighborhood and new schools. Yes, some families decided that they want more: more house, more cars, more vacations and this does lead to the idea their idea of middle class has grown out of reach. HOWEVER it is not the only reason for why it is harder to be in the middle class. To ignore the rise of the two income family and what it wrought is to miss a good part of the puzzle. Consider the increased need for two income earners with the rise of the single parent home due to divorce and out of wedlock birth and it becomes easy to see how the perception that teh middle class is out of reach have occured. This should be more than clear and I will not return to explaining any further.
|
|
|
Post by privateinvestor on Mar 6, 2011 10:56:36 GMT -5
It is true that income and wealth have risen to the top but so has political power. Fat Cats On Walls St, i.e George Soros, Unions, Attorneys, and liberal causes are bankrolling Democrats for years and are pushing for shutdowns and deceiving the public that government spending is NOT the problem but they are behind the shutdowns and protests.
|
|
ameiko
Familiar Member
Joined: Jan 16, 2011 10:48:22 GMT -5
Posts: 812
|
Post by ameiko on Mar 6, 2011 11:02:12 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 26, 2024 7:07:54 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 6, 2011 11:09:38 GMT -5
|
|
ameiko
Familiar Member
Joined: Jan 16, 2011 10:48:22 GMT -5
Posts: 812
|
Post by ameiko on Mar 6, 2011 11:10:43 GMT -5
Quote: Michael Moore Ever notice how Conservatives want people to be successful, but when a liberal is, they hate them? But then again, who do they like, except people exactly like them?
ABSOLUTELY INCORRECT!!!
We have no problem with Michael Moore's success, well except that maybe it's built on lies. That he's a liberal we could care less about.
What we DO take issue with is his hypocrisy where he criticizes the rich and claims that the money that they earned is not their but some national resource while he enjoys his wealth and isn't giving his back.
Do as I say, not as I do: we are sick of liberals and their hypocrisy. The Democrats want demonize Paris Hilton when they want to keep the death tax while ignoring the Kennedies and the like who have abused the law to keep their wealth safe from the death tax.
You have Kerry whining that the rich don't pay enough taxes and then he moors his yacht in another state to avoid taxes.
etc, etc...
Actually, your words remind me how liberals claim to love freedom of speech yet only extend it to those they agree with. Look at how much they HATE Foxnews, Glenn Beck, Hannity, Rush, etc...
By contrast, we don't spend our time hating on Moore unless he does something especially stupid (as he did recently) or similar liberals in the media like Senator Stuart Smalley. Then agian, with so many liberals in the media period, it's a case of trying to find one tree in the forest. Conservatives in the media by their relatively rarity stand out and thus make easy targets.
What's wrong with if the CEO gets a ten percent raise, everyone else in the company should get about a ten percent raise? And if I leave my job, where's my silver parachute? If companies want to save monet, ship those top bracket jobs overseas, and have someone in India do it for $10/hr.
What's wrong is that it's not your company. Of course in America you are free to start your own company and run it as you see fit!
So go forth and show us how it's done. Heck, don't have an idea? Let me give you one! Track down all these rich liberals who want socialized healthcare and start your own health insurance company with those ideas! GO FORTH!
|
|
ameiko
Familiar Member
Joined: Jan 16, 2011 10:48:22 GMT -5
Posts: 812
|
Post by ameiko on Mar 6, 2011 11:17:52 GMT -5
Not really. It becomes quite easy to disguise overall growth by linking to GDP. By contrast, we see by keeping the dollars constant (to take care of inflation) and keep it per capita, the vast amount of money we have spent. If welfare worked, it should go down. Welfare does not work however: we have spent TRILLIONS of dollars on poverty program and gotten MORE POVERTY! All we have to show is a blighter inner city, acceptance of illegit children, and the destruction of the black family as well as a (quoting from Joe Clar in the movie "Lean on Me"- dunno if he said this in real life): "We are being crucified by a process that is turning blacks into a permanent underclass here, Frank. A permanent underclass!" Big Daddy government does not work and we have 40 years to results to show that! Trillions of dollars spent to create more poverty and a bloated government sucking more from the people and the businesses that employ them so it can parcel out those dollars to the group that pleases the government the most! STOP THE MADNESS!!!
|
|
formerexpat
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 12:09:05 GMT -5
Posts: 4,079
|
Post by formerexpat on Mar 6, 2011 13:44:26 GMT -5
|
|
formerexpat
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 12:09:05 GMT -5
Posts: 4,079
|
Post by formerexpat on Mar 6, 2011 13:53:27 GMT -5
Isn't that like saying it's acceptable to increase your standard of living by 2-4% every year because your salary increased that much? I thought our advice to people were to keep your needs/wants constant and bank the raises each year. [/size]
|
|
formerexpat
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 12:09:05 GMT -5
Posts: 4,079
|
Post by formerexpat on Mar 6, 2011 13:58:13 GMT -5
Usury laws are state specific. Irrelevant comment
Overall money supply has decreased. Don't confuse M1 with other money measures. Again, an irrelevant comment.
No - Middle East tensions, increased usage in China and our refusal to explore in the US have more to do with current oil prices than the dollar as the reserve currency. Another irrelevant comment.
Three for three on comments that add no value to the thread.[/size]
|
|
Miss Tequila
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 10:13:45 GMT -5
Posts: 20,602
|
Post by Miss Tequila on Mar 6, 2011 18:05:05 GMT -5
"And the government has done an excellent job of repealing usury laws so pay-day loans at a zillion percent interest are everywhere. "
I can't be the only one thinking "then don't take a pay-day loan"....
|
|
Miss Tequila
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 10:13:45 GMT -5
Posts: 20,602
|
Post by Miss Tequila on Mar 6, 2011 18:27:07 GMT -5
You won't take a pay-day loan if you don't need one, but you may not have that luxury if you are among the poorly paid, young and financially-naive. Recently, these lenders had to be tossed off American Military bases because they were preying on soldiers. Imagine that, people who make minimal amounts of money fighting and dying for their country. Why of course, every 18 or 19 year old on low salaries knows not to take a payday loan. And everyone in that age bracket on low salaries has big bank-accounts too. I was piss-poor until I graduated from college at 24....I never resorted to a payday loan. Believe it or not, it actually is possible to live within one's means, regardless of how limited they are.
|
|
Miss Tequila
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 10:13:45 GMT -5
Posts: 20,602
|
Post by Miss Tequila on Mar 6, 2011 18:54:22 GMT -5
No, but as I said, times are changing. When we were growing up, they weren't hocked all over the place and their were laws that restricted interest too. It certainly is possible to live within your means...assuming you have means, which is a big assumption today. Modern society thrives on an army of ill-paid and disposable workers and there is an entire industry dedicated to tricking them and stealing the pennies from a dead man's eyes. Now many of you know my favorite song regarding debt: "Get rid of it." But by the same token, I don't expect 18 year old soldiers to be experts on the law of 72. The usurers were getting so bad that they were affecting military readiness and possibly softening our soldiers up to be recruited by foreign intelligence. After all, how did the Mafia find out where to target their heists? Often by preying on degenerate gamblers or desperate businessmen who took out loans through shylocks. Well, guess what? Today's shylocks wear 3-piece suites. How the heck old do you think I am?? Geez, the payday loans started popping up when I was at the tail end of college (I graduated in 1995). I not only never took out a payday loan but I also never ran up my credit cards.
|
|
henryclay
Senior Member
Joined: Feb 5, 2011 19:03:37 GMT -5
Posts: 3,685
|
Post by henryclay on Mar 6, 2011 18:59:33 GMT -5
|
|
Miss Tequila
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 10:13:45 GMT -5
Posts: 20,602
|
Post by Miss Tequila on Mar 6, 2011 19:06:12 GMT -5
Yes, and Misstequila, everyone's financial picture is different. Some make more money, some have fewer bills. When the problem becomes so bad that the US Military has to make policy changes to ban the lenders from bases to avoid creating the agents and double-agents of the future, that tells you something right there. I'm confused...are military personnel not allowed to take payday loans or the lenders just not allowed on base? It sucks to be poor but I was poor for years and never blamed anyone else for my situation.
|
|
|
Post by BeenThere...DoneThat... on Mar 6, 2011 20:31:44 GMT -5
<<< Perhaps there is a failure to communicate with us. >>> ...there is... looks like we were looking at two different conversations... not surprising in threads such as this... with many posters addressing many others... oh well...
|
|
deziloooooo
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 16:22:04 GMT -5
Posts: 10,723
|
Post by deziloooooo on Mar 6, 2011 20:46:49 GMT -5
You won't take a pay-day loan if you don't need one, but you may not have that luxury if you are among the poorly paid, young and financially-naive. Recently, these lenders had to be tossed off American Military bases because they were preying on soldiers. Imagine that, people who make minimal amounts of money fighting and dying for their country. Why of course, every 18 or 19 year old on low salaries knows not to take a payday loan. And everyone in that age bracket on low salaries has big bank-accounts too. Every one preys on the soldiers even fellow soldiers. I remember once , just out of basic, a fellow bunks mate showed me a Bible he had purchased from one of the salesman who would come by, a large one, all gold leafed{sure it was} to send to his Mom. Cost was over what he makes a month, this was the old Army, not today's, payments automatically taken out of pay, all signed, sealed, delivered. I was young but not that young, college , knew a bit, what could I say, once I found it was a done deal, as Mom taught me, if asked and already purchased , just go with the flow, to late for a opinion, so told him, "beautiful, Mom will just Cherish it, great son you are to think of Mom that way". I would have loved to meet the salesman somewhere, but probably was a Non Com selling on the side , going from barracks to barracks praying on their fellows..lots of that was being done.
|
|
formerexpat
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 12:09:05 GMT -5
Posts: 4,079
|
Post by formerexpat on Mar 6, 2011 21:10:37 GMT -5
We've already discredited this study many times over on the other boards.
It is your bad. You're either ignoring or do not know the other components of the equation and that overall money has decreased.
Good thing the laws are based on state of residence of the consumer and not state of domicile of the company then, huh?
You're on a roll today.
[/size]
|
|