Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


* * * * * 2 votes

How to fight inequality


  • Please log in to reply
254 replies to this topic

#1    questionmark

questionmark

    Cinicus Magnus

  • Member
  • 35,418 posts
  • Joined:26 Jun 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Greece and Des Moines, IA

  • In a flat world there is an explanation to everything.

Posted 17 February 2014 - 09:55 PM

Washington Post said:





Lawrence Summers is a professor and past president at Harvard. He was Treasury secretary from 1999 to 2001 and economic adviser to President Obama from 2009 through 2010.

The United States may be on course to becoming a “Downton Abbey” economy. There are valid causes for concern about inequality: sharp increases in the share of income going to the top 1 percent of earners, a rising share of income going to profits, stagnant real wages and a rising gap between productivity growth and growth in median family incomes. A generation ago, it could have been asserted that the economy’s overall growth rate was the dominant determinant of growth in middle-class incomes and progress in reducing poverty. This is no longer a plausible claim.

Issues associated with an increasingly unequal distribution of economic rewards are likely to be with us long after cyclical conditions have normalized and budget deficits have been addressed.

read more


A skeptic is a well informed believer and a pessimist a well informed optimist
The most dangerous views of the world are from those who have never seen it. ~ Alexander v. Humboldt
If you want to bulls**t me please do it so that it takes me more than a minute to find out

about me

#2    Mikko-kun

Mikko-kun

    New life

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,475 posts
  • Joined:27 Apr 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Amniotic fluid of consfious life

  • Observation, individual resourcefulness... what would we be without them?

Posted 17 February 2014 - 11:36 PM

Put an iron ball chain to every 1%:er (not the bikers but the wall streeters) so they dont fly tax paradise and tax em.

I doubt you'll achieve anything truly good without international cooperation, though tax policy change is a step for the better.

I've been born again 31,8,2014 approximately 21:35 local time. A moment free of clutter in the mind, emancipating myself like an escapist, allowing myself to breathe life in a stronger, less physical level... though it does resonate to physical world. It's the oomph.

#3    aztek

aztek

    Majestic 12 Operative

  • Member
  • 5,909 posts
  • Joined:12 Nov 2006

Posted 18 February 2014 - 12:48 AM

lmao,
The 1% are the ones making laws, does anyone honestly think they will make laws, or tax policy that does not fit them??  my 5 y.o. knows that, but apparently op does not.

RESIDENT TROLL.

#4    aztek

aztek

    Majestic 12 Operative

  • Member
  • 5,909 posts
  • Joined:12 Nov 2006

Posted 18 February 2014 - 01:03 AM

not to mention if your goal is to take someone else's stuff, whatever that is. you are bigger problem than 1%.

1917 October revolution, bolshevics took everything from rich, than this "take away" mentality progressed, and they started robbing and looting, and also murdering, anyone who had anything, no matter how little, they were all called "kylak" and it became normal to rob anyone like that.

i'm pretty sure, they also started from "take money from rich, that they stole from us" and ended, everyone with anything is a fair game.
there s absolutely no reason to believe that it will be different anywhere else.

funny thing is, they achieved that equality, everyone was equally poor.

Edited by aztek, 18 February 2014 - 01:26 AM.

RESIDENT TROLL.

#5    MiskatonicGrad

MiskatonicGrad

    Remote Viewer

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 562 posts
  • Joined:19 Apr 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Dunwich USA

  • "the natural progress of things is liberty to yield and goverment to gain ground." Thomas Jefferson

Posted 18 February 2014 - 01:49 AM

You think the economy is in shambles now. just wait until the government steps in and tries(even though they won't because they are either part of the 1% or attached to their purse strings) take more than their fair share from the 1%.
let's just imagine half of the 1% pulling all of their money out of the stock market at one time.

"Were we directed from Washington when to sow, and when to reap, we should soon want bread" --Thomas Jefferson(1821)

"No man's life, liberty, or property is safe while the legislature is in session"--Mark Twain(1866)

"I have sworn upon the altar of God, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man." --Thomas Jefferson(1800)

#6    spartan max2

spartan max2

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,639 posts
  • Joined:15 Nov 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ohio

  • There's nothing so absurd that if you repeat it often enough

Posted 18 February 2014 - 01:52 AM

I got a crazy plan maybe the government could not take 50% of every ones dollars :innocent:
People would have so much more money.


Instead of arguing about who we should tax more, lets just tax everyone less. One cheer for "radical" thinking lol

Edited by spartan max2, 18 February 2014 - 01:53 AM.

" I imagine that the intellegent people are the ones so intellegent that they dont even need or want to look "intellegent" anymore".
Criss Jami

#7    DieChecker

DieChecker

    I'm a Rogue Scholar

  • Member
  • 18,324 posts
  • Joined:21 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Portland, Oregon, USA

  • Hey, I'm not wrong. I'm just not completely right.

Posted 18 February 2014 - 02:44 AM

Just like "fixing" the Poor, if you "fix" the top 1% then there is still going to be a a top 1% and they will always be targets for "inequality".

Even if you take 20% more from the top 1% that is only going to be a small fraction of the money that is needed to balance the budget, much less help the Poor. How is collecting more money to reduce the Deficit going to help the poor?

In 2011 the US pulled in 1.1 Trillion from individual income taxes, of which the 1% paid about 25%. So that equals about 275 billion dollars. So even if we doubled their taxes, we'd only get about 300 billion more, while our Budget Deficit (2013) is around 680 billion. (It was 1.1 trillion in 2012). And lets be honest doubling the 1%s taxes is just not going to happen.

Here at Intel we make processors on 12 inch wafers. And, the individual processors on the wafers are called die. And, I am employed to check these die. That is why I am the DieChecker.

At times one remains faithful to a cause only because its opponents do not cease to be insipid. - Friedrich Nietzsche

Qualifications? This is cryptozoology, dammit! All that is required is the spirit of adventure. - Night Walker

#8    Mike D boy

Mike D boy

    ...from the Desert...

  • Member
  • 2,401 posts
  • Joined:06 Aug 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Palm Desert, Cal US America

  • he's Native and Indio-geneous to the Americas.

Posted 18 February 2014 - 03:27 AM

When the poor earn somewhere between $10-25,000 a year versus the top one percent are billionaires, it comes to indicate the wide scale of rich vs. poor and middle class in America is the widest since the 1920s before the Great Depression. To resolve income inequality involves raising incomes of the non-rich and ensuring the rich pay a fair share of taxes to fund public social services like welfare, food stamps and disability. America's rich pay a lower percentage tax rate than middle class people and was a fixed rate from congressional actions during the Reagan and two Bushes administrations. Mitt Romney goes on and on in his failed 2012 presidential campaign on the rich are "job creators" and corporations "are people", and opposed the "47% are takers" of any government assistance. He views the poor as a burden on society and expects income inequality to be resolved by lower-income people to simply "get a job."

Instead of the war of poverty, what we have is pure class warfare of "soaking the rich" in favor of corporations, banks and other huge sources of wealth, because the US government falsely believed in giving the richest one percent a low income tax was good for creating business, the taxation rates for non-rich Americans remain much higher than what the rich holding more personal income are paying. This is ridiculous...the feds focus more on Corporate welfare and getting soft on the rich, instead of general welfare and bashing the poor (the Welfare Reform Act of the 1990s was suppose to put pressure on welfare recipients to find jobs they can find).

Poor people are labeled and vilified by some conservative critics and Republican political officials for their assumed "laziness" is why they are poor and income inequality, they claim, are liberal or Democrat opinions aimed against corporations and "class warfare" against the rich elite.  Verbally abusive poor-bashing tactics made many of us ignored the real deal of income inequality and poverty goes on underneath. Income inequality can be easily resolved with strategic propositions to increase funding on anti-poverty initiatives and job creation programs. And making the richest pay a somehow higher tax rate or equivalent to the amount the middle-class pays (20-25% of annual taxable income) will send a message that the rich don't have to be treated too special from everyone else.

:innocent: The Truth is Out There - the X Files. :alien:

#9    DieChecker

DieChecker

    I'm a Rogue Scholar

  • Member
  • 18,324 posts
  • Joined:21 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Portland, Oregon, USA

  • Hey, I'm not wrong. I'm just not completely right.

Posted 18 February 2014 - 03:39 AM

View PostMike D boy, on 18 February 2014 - 03:27 AM, said:

Poor people are labeled and vilified by some conservative critics and Republican political officials for their assumed "laziness" is why they are poor and income inequality, they claim, are liberal or Democrat opinions aimed against corporations and "class warfare" against the rich elite.  Verbally abusive poor-bashing tactics made many of us ignored the real deal of income inequality and poverty goes on underneath. Income inequality can be easily resolved with strategic propositions to increase funding on anti-poverty initiatives and job creation programs. And making the richest pay a somehow higher tax rate or equivalent to the amount the middle-class pays (20-25% of annual taxable income) will send a message that the rich don't have to be treated too special from everyone else.

I still don't see how taking an extra 10% from the rich and giving an extra 10% to the poor is going to change anything. The ratio of inequality is not going to change that much. What is needed is for the Poor to get education. Just look at statisitics on who makes the money in the US. Those with an associates degree are well above the poverty line. Those who dropped out of HS or who did not pass 9th grade are chronically under the poverty line. Giving all those dropouts a handout for free is not going to get them out of poverty. It is going to perpetuate poverty. Education is what is needed. The FedGov should probably set up hundreds of Federally Funded 2 year colleges where the underprivilaged can go for free, or almost for free. I feel that everyone should earn their government money (Except maybe Social Security, because that is actually supposed to be your money.), but I also feel that if students went full time, that would be the equivalent to working.

HEY KIDS!!!! Stay in school. Go to community college. Don't be a poverty statistic.

http://trends.colleg...tion-level-2008

Honest Qurestion: How does someone having a LOT of money make someone poorer? It would seem to me that it is inflation that makes people poorer.

Edited by DieChecker, 18 February 2014 - 03:53 AM.

Here at Intel we make processors on 12 inch wafers. And, the individual processors on the wafers are called die. And, I am employed to check these die. That is why I am the DieChecker.

At times one remains faithful to a cause only because its opponents do not cease to be insipid. - Friedrich Nietzsche

Qualifications? This is cryptozoology, dammit! All that is required is the spirit of adventure. - Night Walker

#10    MiskatonicGrad

MiskatonicGrad

    Remote Viewer

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 562 posts
  • Joined:19 Apr 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Dunwich USA

  • "the natural progress of things is liberty to yield and goverment to gain ground." Thomas Jefferson

Posted 18 February 2014 - 04:20 AM

View PostMike D boy, on 18 February 2014 - 03:27 AM, said:

When the poor earn somewhere between $10-25,000 a year versus the top one percent are billionaires, it comes to indicate the wide scale of rich vs. poor and middle class in America is the widest since the 1920s before the Great Depression. To resolve income inequality involves raising incomes of the non-rich and ensuring the rich pay a fair share of taxes to fund public social services like welfare, food stamps and disability. America's rich pay a lower percentage tax rate than middle class people and was a fixed rate from congressional actions during the Reagan and two Bushes administrations. Mitt Romney goes on and on in his failed 2012 presidential campaign on the rich are "job creators" and corporations "are people", and opposed the "47% are takers" of any government assistance. He views the poor as a burden on society and expects income inequality to be resolved by lower-income people to simply "get a job."

Instead of the war of poverty, what we have is pure class warfare of "soaking the rich" in favor of corporations, banks and other huge sources of wealth, because the US government falsely believed in giving the richest one percent a low income tax was good for creating business, the taxation rates for non-rich Americans remain much higher than what the rich holding more personal income are paying. This is ridiculous...the feds focus more on Corporate welfare and getting soft on the rich, instead of general welfare and bashing the poor (the Welfare Reform Act of the 1990s was suppose to put pressure on welfare recipients to find jobs they can find).

Poor people are labeled and vilified by some conservative critics and Republican political officials for their assumed "laziness" is why they are poor and income inequality, they claim, are liberal or Democrat opinions aimed against corporations and "class warfare" against the rich elite.  Verbally abusive poor-bashing tactics made many of us ignored the real deal of income inequality and poverty goes on underneath. Income inequality can be easily resolved with strategic propositions to increase funding on anti-poverty initiatives and job creation programs. And making the richest pay a somehow higher tax rate or equivalent to the amount the middle-class pays (20-25% of annual taxable income) will send a message that the rich don't have to be treated too special from everyone else.

Reagan and two Bushes because we didn't have 8 years of Clinton mixed up in there and we haven't had 5+ years of Obama.

you do realize during the last Bush administration the rich took home 60% more per year but during Obama they are taking home 120% more? welcome to the liberal utopia!

"Were we directed from Washington when to sow, and when to reap, we should soon want bread" --Thomas Jefferson(1821)

"No man's life, liberty, or property is safe while the legislature is in session"--Mark Twain(1866)

"I have sworn upon the altar of God, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man." --Thomas Jefferson(1800)

#11    Purifier

Purifier

    Psychic Eye

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,967 posts
  • Joined:12 Feb 2010
  • Gender:Male

  • Wild Card

Posted 18 February 2014 - 05:11 AM

View Postaztek, on 18 February 2014 - 01:03 AM, said:

not to mention if your goal is to take someone else's stuff, whatever that is. you are bigger problem than 1%.

1917 October revolution, bolshevics took everything from rich, than this "take away" mentality progressed, and they started robbing and looting, and also murdering, anyone who had anything, no matter how little, they were all called "kylak" and it became normal to rob anyone like that.

i'm pretty sure, they also started from "take money from rich, that they stole from us" and ended, everyone with anything is a fair game.
there s absolutely no reason to believe that it will be different anywhere else.

funny thing is, they achieved that equality, everyone was equally poor.



What you say is true, but that all happened because Tsar Nicholas 2 had the "let them eat cake" attitude or mentality with his people. With enough people to revolt and overpower the government, being hungry and living in poor conditions for a long time  tends to make people angry and take desperate measures. There are many lessons about that in human history that we should all pay attention too.

Study the past, if you would divine the future.
- Confucius

#12    Br Cornelius

Br Cornelius

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 10,457 posts
  • Joined:13 Aug 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Eire

  • Stupid Monkeys.

    Life Sucks.
    Get over it.

Posted 18 February 2014 - 10:59 AM

Purifier, you said it better than me.
Ultimately if gross social inequality persists for to long history tells us that the poor, who ultimately make up the bulk of the doers, cut off the heads of the rich. The introduction of various social provisions was a survival mechanism of the rich after the great depression - to maintain the status quo. The rich seem to have forgotten the lessons of their ancestors.

Solve it or suffer is what I say.

Br Cornelius

Edited by Br Cornelius, 18 February 2014 - 11:11 AM.

I believe nothing, but I have my suspicions.

Robert Anton Wilson

#13    Br Cornelius

Br Cornelius

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 10,457 posts
  • Joined:13 Aug 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Eire

  • Stupid Monkeys.

    Life Sucks.
    Get over it.

Posted 18 February 2014 - 11:21 AM

View PostDieChecker, on 18 February 2014 - 03:39 AM, said:

I still don't see how taking an extra 10% from the rich and giving an extra 10% to the poor is going to change anything. The ratio of inequality is not going to change that much. What is needed is for the Poor to get education. Just look at statisitics on who makes the money in the US. Those with an associates degree are well above the poverty line. Those who dropped out of HS or who did not pass 9th grade are chronically under the poverty line. Giving all those dropouts a handout for free is not going to get them out of poverty. It is going to perpetuate poverty. Education is what is needed. The FedGov should probably set up hundreds of Federally Funded 2 year colleges where the underprivilaged can go for free, or almost for free. I feel that everyone should earn their government money (Except maybe Social Security, because that is actually supposed to be your money.), but I also feel that if students went full time, that would be the equivalent to working.

HEY KIDS!!!! Stay in school. Go to community college. Don't be a poverty statistic.

http://trends.colleg...tion-level-2008

Honest Qurestion: How does someone having a LOT of money make someone poorer? It would seem to me that it is inflation that makes people poorer.

Real inflation, not the measured one, has been fuelled by having so much "investment" money sloshing around the system that everything has become relatively more expensive. The Dollar plunges as the real value of the currency on international stage has gone down. this directly effects poor people because they rely on imports for much of what they need.
The reality is that since the Reagan era real wages of the poor and middle class have flatlined, causing people to accumulate huge debt burdens. Over the same time the rich have become progressively more rich, which has had the knock on effect of pricing the poor out of investing in wealth generating assets.
Ultimately the measure of this, which hides behind the stats, is that most of the average population now need 2-3 jobs to survive where as previously a single job supported a whole family. At the same time personal indebtedness is at the highest rate that it ever has been. These are all symptoms of a system based on wealth inequality and ultimately as more people are pushed into this systemic poverty trap tolerance for politicans which have facilitated it will grow very short.

America has been mythologising to itself that this is the natural order of things, but the reality of personal suffering to the millions of poor Americans is starting to punch through the illusion.

Br Cornelius

Edited by Br Cornelius, 18 February 2014 - 11:25 AM.

I believe nothing, but I have my suspicions.

Robert Anton Wilson

#14    RavenHawk

RavenHawk

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 3,036 posts
  • Joined:09 Aug 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 18 February 2014 - 02:59 PM

The best way to fight inequality is to teach people how to fish rather than give them the fish.  Because there will be times that you canít always be there to give them fish or you just wonít have the fish to give.  You have to instill dignity and self-reliance.  You canít do that if people are on the dole.  And you canít force them to learn and if they donít, itís not anyone elseís fault or responsibility.  Likewise, if you do not know how to manage money, you will never have it.  People need to learn how to manage their funds wisely.  People have to learn to sink or swim all on their own.  Giving people money that they havenít earned does not instill using money wisely.  Wealth redistribution is indeed effective.  It is effective in robbing people of what is theirs.  That is not only the wealth of the rich (and of the nation) but the dignity of both the rich and poor.  It squanders that wealth and makes everyone equally poor.  It encourages dependency.  Nothing will have changed.  The wealthy still have the skills to manage money will eventually make more money and the poor will then get poorer because the wealthy will just not have as much wealth as before because their base has been reduced.  And in turn, that makes a nation overall poorer.  Wealth can be a renewable or nonrenewable resource.  It just depends on how it is used.  Redistribution makes it finite or one way.  Reinvestment is what makes money grow but redistribution is not reinvestment.  Redistribution destroys wealth.  Why would anyone want to destroy wealth?

*Signature removed* Forum Rules

#15    questionmark

questionmark

    Cinicus Magnus

  • Member
  • 35,418 posts
  • Joined:26 Jun 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Greece and Des Moines, IA

  • In a flat world there is an explanation to everything.

Posted 18 February 2014 - 03:02 PM

View PostRavenHawk, on 18 February 2014 - 02:59 PM, said:

The best way to fight inequality is to teach people how to fish rather than give them the fish.  Because there will be times that you can't always be there to give them fish or you just won't have the fish to give.  You have to instill dignity and self-reliance.  You can't do that if people are on the dole.  And you can't force them to learn and if they don't, it's not anyone else's fault or responsibility.  Likewise, if you do not know how to manage money, you will never have it.  People need to learn how to manage their funds wisely.  People have to learn to sink or swim all on their own.  Giving people money that they haven't earned does not instill using money wisely.  Wealth redistribution is indeed effective.  It is effective in robbing people of what is theirs.  That is not only the wealth of the rich (and of the nation) but the dignity of both the rich and poor.  It squanders that wealth and makes everyone equally poor.  It encourages dependency.  Nothing will have changed.  The wealthy still have the skills to manage money will eventually make more money and the poor will then get poorer because the wealthy will just not have as much wealth as before because their base has been reduced.  And in turn, that makes a nation overall poorer.  Wealth can be a renewable or nonrenewable resource.  It just depends on how it is used.  Redistribution makes it finite or one way.  Reinvestment is what makes money grow but redistribution is not reinvestment.  Redistribution destroys wealth.  Why would anyone want to destroy wealth?

nice hollow phrase if by law the fishing grounds are divided up by 5% of the population.

Yes, redistributing existing wealth gets us nowhere, but redistributing the means to create wealth might.

A skeptic is a well informed believer and a pessimist a well informed optimist
The most dangerous views of the world are from those who have never seen it. ~ Alexander v. Humboldt
If you want to bulls**t me please do it so that it takes me more than a minute to find out

about me




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users