Occupy Wall St.

[woolybug25]

A child raised by a single mother in the inner city has it tough, very tough. And, unfortunately, it is very unlikely that child will have a succesful life. However, the predicatment of largely African-American inner city youths is a quite distinct challenge from the broader socio economic challenges in American society, or say the Wall St. protestors, who are mostly white and middle class.

That is a broad generalization that you have no valid proof of, but even if you did. Do you really think that it is just as easy for a middle class person to thrive versus a child of privileged? Do you think that a middle class kid that paid tons of student loans, worked 80 hours a week and became a CEO had it no harder than say.... Paris Hilton?

The fact of the matter is that they are pissed that the middle class has little importance to this country anymore. They are sick of watching the rich get richer, the poor get poorer and the middle class get completely disregarded.

 

[magogian]

I don't see your humor.

But i'm guessing you didn't have a good, rational, reasonable response... so instead, you called him a dumb a**. Good for you. Even if his comment would have been stupid (I didn't see it that way), your response was was intellectually weak.

I'de side with a dumb a** over an a$$hole any day.

Wooly,

Are you kidding me? He was the one throwing around A$$hole. I was merely quoting him. But that makes me the a$$hole? That is some weird logic.

And, of course, he just flat rejected my contention even though the article I cite quite clearly lays out the various studies on the subject.

 

[magogian]

That is a broad generalization that you have no valid proof of, but even if you did. Do you really think that it is just as easy for a middle class person to thrive versus a child of privileged? Do you think that a middle class kid that paid tons of student loans, worked 80 hours a week and became a CEO had it no harder than say.... Paris Hilton?

The fact of the matter is that they are pissed that the middle class has little importance to this country anymore. They are sick of watching the rich get richer, the poor get poorer and the middle class get completely disregarded.

That is the problem with anecdotes. Citing Paris Hilton means nothing.

I've done a pretty good job providing evidence where possible for my claims. In response, you guys generally say "na na I'm not listening."

And you generally provide unsupported and incorrect assertions. As an example, you say the "poor get poorer." This is flat out incorrect. As this table shows, incomes for the poorest fifth have been generally stable: Historical Income Tables - Households - U.S Census Bureau

Also, what these tables also don't show is that the purchasing power of the poor has vastly increased over time. For example, the biggest health problem for the poor is not lack of food but obesity, etc. Most poor have cable and flat screen TVs, etc.

Edit: And I'll just leave it at that, even though there are many topics that would be fun to address. That's what I get for thinking I get could a decent engagement on the interwebs.

 

[Corry]

That is the problem with anecdotes. Citing Paris Hilton means nothing.

I've done a pretty good job providing evidence where possible for my claims. In response, you guys generally say "na na I'm not listening."

And you generally provide unsupported and incorrect assertions. As an example, you say the "poor get poorer." This is flat out incorrect. As this table shows, incomes for the poorest fifth have been generally stable: Historical Income Tables - Households - U.S Census Bureau

Also, what these tables also don't show is that the purchasing power of the poor has vastly increased over time. For example, the biggest health problem for the poor is not lack of food but obesity, etc. Most poor have cable and flat screen TVs, etc.

If I hear one more person insinuate that since the poor have a flat screens it can't be all that bad I'm going to throw up. If you’ve bought a TV in the last five years guess what it has a flat screen. Is it the fault of the poor that we have had advancement in the technology? As for you point that the poor is obese, well there is a reason for that, and it’s because they’re poor. Fast food while cheap is really not conducive to a balanced diet. I see your points and I respect your opinion, but disagree with your assessment of the current climate.

 

[11cracker11]

To the obvious liberal who quoted a poll that stated 66% of Americans feel income is "distributed" unfairly to only 26% who feel it is fair. First of all, income is not distributed in the United States of America. There are three ways you get money in the US: inheritance, earning it(ordinary income or capital gains investments, dividends, etc) and the old fashioned way, stealing it. That question is horribly slanted from the outset to make people feel as the system is inherently unfair and successful people are just given money. I'm sure if you asked the same people polled if a brain surgeon should make a lot more money than a janitor, the majority of Americans would whole heartedly agree(minus all the Marxists on this thread, of course).

Her is the numbers from 2009 Tax Returns:
Top 1% earn $343K+ 16.9% of taxable inc. paid 37% of taxes
Top 5% earn $154k+ 32% of taxable inc and paid 59% of taxes
Top 10% earn $112k+ 43% of taxable inc and paid 70% of taxes
Top 50% earn $32.3k+ 87% of taxable inc and paid 98% of taxes

And the Bottom 50% which so many of you bleeding heart whack jobs are so concerned about earned 13% of all taxable inc yet only paid 2% of the federal income taxes. It is obvious to me who isn't "paying their fair share" and it sure isn't the wealthy. The bottom 50% in our country live under the protection of greatest military in the history of the world, have the cleanest water and some of the safest highways in the world. They should be kicking in more, not taking money in the form of Section 8 housing, food stamps or the Earned Income Credit. These people are a drain on society, so lets make 15 million of them by passing comprehensive immigration reform! Plus if you went into debt to get an undergrad degree it better have been in computer programming or advanced mathematics, otherwise boo hoo hoo, because teh job market is pretty tight right now

 

[GoIrish41]

Wooly,

Are you kidding me? He was the one throwing around A$$hole. I was merely quoting him. But that makes me the a$$hole? That is some weird logic.

And, of course, he just flat rejected my contention even though the article I cite quite clearly lays out the various studies on the subject.

I didn't call anyone an A$$hole. I suggested that the author of the quote from what I assumed was directly from the article, was a dumba** because he made an idiotic generaization and treated it as if it was a fact. Perhaps I was wrong and the quote was not from the article and you made that idiotic generalization. For that I appologize to the author of the article. The problem with the article you cited is that it is not research as you proposed, but the opinions of a clearly bias individual trying to prove his point by citing "research" done by God knows who to give substance to his clearly formed beliefs. The problem is that he was not good at making his bias transparent. It isn't that difficult to spot an article that begins with the conclusion and finds those of like mind who have conducted "studies" that agree with his point. This particular article made such stupid statements that I find it hard to believe that anyone would find it credible. The fact that you cite it as "proof" of your point does not speak well about your ability to view this issue with an open mind. You are perfectly within your rights to think I'm a dumba**, but I think someone who suggests that the CEO of say, a large construction company, works harder than the laborer who works on his job sites is more of a dumba** than anyone who points out how stupid that statement is. If that shoe fits, well, I'm sorry.

 

[Dacian_Irish]

Why do people defend a group they are not part of. None of us are in the 1%. That's a fact!

I wonder what the income distribution of the 1% is...

 

[IrishLax]

Perhaps they are put off by the "pull yourself up by your bootstraps" mentality that seems to be prevelant among those whose parents had the means to put their children through college is unpaletable to them. Perhaps they find it unacceptable that they worked their way through college or worked their entire lives only to have their jobs shipped overseas where people are willing to work for pennies on the dollar all because it produces a bigger profit for the largest companies in the country. The beneficiaries of good fortune joking continuously about how their incredible saccrifices and hard work got them their (with help from mommy and daddy, of course) is hard to swallow.

Nice reading comprehension. It always just takes one guy like you who has a predetermined way he is going to look at things to ruin a thread. I point out, multiple times if you read other posts, that I'm comfortable and this doesn't apply to me. I'm talking about guys like 30 year old Manjunath who sits a cube or so away from me... busted his *** in India to get through school, paid his way to come over here, got a masters degree, and now is making some good money... but also now has to pay back incredible amounts of loans, support his family, pay for incredibly high housing in this area or live an hour+ away from the office and never see his children. You think $100k really goes that far when you spent 10+ years of your life just battling your way out of slums and accruing debt to get a good education and good job? And live in an area like DC? Get real. These are the guys I'm talking about.

And with regards to "mommy and daddy"... my "mommy" was born in poor, rural Marshall, Missouri and did jobs like scooping up chicken sh*t and detassling corn growing up to get enough money to buy lunch. She also worked her *** off in school, got good enough scores and grades to get in to Notre Dame, got an engineering degree when female engineers were unheard of, and earned all her money work 60+ hours a week to this day. She told me stories of how she cried herself to sleep freshman year because of how bad she was doing in school since her education in rural Marshall was awful and didn't prepare her for college. She thought about quitting many times. Did she? No. She worked even harder, graduated and got a job.

Where do you think the $200k to pay for my school came from? The lottery? It came from the exact type of person you're trying to get me to sympathize with. A have not who worked to make something of themselves... and then made fiscally responsible choices to provide for her family.

This is a protest about the haves and have nots. It is about having equal opportunities available to all Americans. The disparity in income in this country is extreme and becoming more and more so as time passes.

This is just factually wrong. See the link I provided in an earlier post. If you're going to state something as fact, at least research it.

 

[BobD]

Maybe someone should change the name of this thread to "Unlimited Politics Thread", because it has obviously warped far away from just the Occupy Wall Street topic.

I think this may highlight why the Occupy movement probably won't succeed in solving anything......lack of planning, lack of focus, lack of leadership and lack of goals.

I'm also beginning to think that many of the protesters, have become protestors, instead being part of the wealthiest 1%, for the very same reasons.....lack of planning, lack of focus, lack of leadership and lack of goals.

 

[Rhode Irish]

There are some disappointingly ignorant comments in this thread, and obviously I, nor anyone else, has the time to go through and address each one of them.

One thing I would like to address is the idea that the movement needs a coherent message to be credible. This is wrong on so many levels I'm not even sure where to start. Maybe I'll try a metaphor: if one day you wake up and your house has no electricity, you may not be able to identify what the specific problem is or how the electric company should go about fixing it. You just know that there is a definite problem that needs to be fixed. In the case of Occupy Wall Street, the problem that they are looking to have addressed is the growing disparity in income and wealth between the very, very, very wealthy and everyone else. The idea behind the protests is to bring the problem to the nation's attention; any potential solutions are likely complicated and massive in scale.

I am not a hippie. I've never marched in a protest, and this Occupy thing is no exception. But I am watching. I do support the underlying cause. I do believe that the growing disparity in resources between the rich and everyone else undermining the American way of life. This isn't about rich and poor; it is about the unimaginably wealthy and everyone else.

I've taken several comments in this thread to indicate that the poster identifies more with protested than the protesters. I find this shocking and extremely misguided. If you make $200,000/yr, you're doing pretty well. But you are poorer compared to the protested than the protesters are to you. And it isn't even close. It is sad that so many Americans are so pacified by their moderate existences that they dare not create any sort of disturbance.

If you work for a living, you are being exploited in our system. That means that the engineer, or the attorney, or the doctor, or the small business owner, or even the investment banker that has a boss and shows up to work every day and gets a paycheck at the end of the week is part of the "99%". Just because you drive a Lexus or don't have any student loans doesn't mean you're more like the protested than the protesters. It is so disappointing to hear normal, working people refer to the Occupy protesters as "they." As far as I'm concerned, "they" are out there sacrificing on our behalf because we don't have the balls to give up the moderate comfort we have in our lives to fight for a fairer, more just system.

 

[23145tp]

The vast majority want to "redistribute" the wealth is this country (socialism/communism). A friend of mine who works in the downtown area where the "Occupy Wall St" protesters were located asked at least 10 of the protesters what they were protesting and all 10 were not exactly sure what they were protesting....some protest!!!!!......

 

[BeauBenken]

I think this may highlight why the Occupy movement probably won't succeed in solving anything......lack of planning, lack of focus, lack of leadership and lack of goals.

I'm also beginning to think that many of the protesters, have become protestors, instead being part of the wealthiest 1%, for the very same reasons.....lack of planning, lack of focus, lack of leadership and lack of goals.

And I feel that a lot of this can be put on parenting.

I think this country runs on families which isn't a bad thing necessarily (except in politics where it becomes a cesspool of particular families' ideas.)

It takes one generation to change things for your family though.

Decided I would mix things up a bit.

 

[Rhode Irish]

Quote:

This is a protest about the haves and have nots. It is about having equal opportunities available to all Americans. The disparity in income in this country is extreme and becoming more and more so as time passes.

This is just factually wrong. See the link I provided in an earlier post. If you're going to state something as fact, at least research it.

Actually, no. It isn't wrong. I'm not sure what you posted earlier, but I can tell you that his point does not lack for factual support:

 

[GoIrish41]

Nice reading comprehension. It always just takes one guy like you who has a predetermined way he is going to look at things to ruin a thread. I point out, multiple times if you read other posts, that I'm comfortable and this doesn't apply to me. I'm talking about guys like 30 year old Manjunath who sits a cube or so away from me... busted his *** in India to get through school, paid his way to come over here, got a masters degree, and now is making some good money... but also now has to pay back incredible amounts of loans, support his family, pay for incredibly high housing in this area or live an hour+ away from the office and never see his children. You think $100k really goes that far when you spent 10+ years of your life just battling your way out of slums and accruing debt to get a good education and good job? And live in an area like DC? Get real. These are the guys I'm talking about.

And with regards to "mommy and daddy"... my "mommy" was born in poor, rural Marshall, Missouri and did jobs like scooping up chicken sh*t and detassling corn growing up to get enough money to buy lunch. She also worked her *** off in school, got good enough scores and grades to get in to Notre Dame, got an engineering degree when female engineers were unheard of, and earned all her money work 60+ hours a week to this day. She told me stories of how she cried herself to sleep freshman year because of how bad she was doing in school since her education in rural Marshall was awful and didn't prepare her for college. She thought about quitting many times. Did she? No. She worked even harder, graduated and got a job.

Where do you think the $200k to pay for my school came from? The lottery? It came from the exact type of person you're trying to get me to sympathize with. A have not who worked to make something of themselves... and then made fiscally responsible choices to provide for her family.



This is just factually wrong. See the link I provided in an earlier post. If you're going to state something as fact, at least research it.

You know, I started reading this thread last night and read several posts I was uncomfortable with, but not inspired me to respond until I came to the one of yours that I responded to ... the one about how you always joke about how you are in the top 1%, which I found highly ironic since you said that your parents paid for your education. In that post, you said nothing about your mother growing up poor and working her way up the economic mountain. Good on her, I have a great deal of respect for those who are able to do that. You also said nothing about the guy two cubes down from you who came from india in that post and I equally appreciate his tenacity. If your mother or the fella a couple of cubes down would have made the same aguments you made in your initial post, their comments would have had credibility. The problem I had with that post was that you weren't one of the people who you said we all should be. Your parents paid for your education but you think that everyone else ought to suck it up and work their way to the top. Someone in your position (and understand I only read that one post) should not have such a strong opionion that so far away from the reality of his own experience and impose it on the rest of us. I found the content of that one post so distasteful that I didn't read any of your other posts, so you'll forgive me if I don't friend you on Facebook just to hang on your every thought. So, you see it isn't really about reading comprehension, it is that I found your initial thoughts on this topic so hypocritical that I wasn't going to listen to anything else you had to say because it simply wasn't credible. Maybe a softer touch that explains your view more thoughouly from the begining would ease your frustrations that people haven't listened to what you were saying in subsequent posts. As to the tables you posted, I believe what I see with my eyes. I know people who have lost their jobs over the past few years who are now working two or three jobs to even approach what they were making. These are good people who are far more worse off than they have ever been and the more time passes, the worse it gets. I'm going to look at the world with my eyes open and let what I see inform my thoughts. But, I guess you can look at a table you found on the internet and use it to tell me I'm wrong if you'd like.

 

[BobD]

Why do people defend a group they are not part of. None of us are in the 1%. That's a fact!

I wonder what the income distribution of the 1% is...

Because whether you choose to believe it or not, the American dream is still achievable. If the protesters ever had their way, it wouldn't be.

Nobody as ever become wealthy protesting, until now. It appears some of the protester may have converted to capitalist. Over the last few weeks many individuals and companies have applied for naming rights to "Occupy" and "Occupy Wall St."

 

[BeauBenken]

You know, I started reading this thread last night and read several posts I was uncomfortable with, but not inspired me to respond until I came to the one of yours that I responded to ... the one about how you always joke about how you are in the top 1%, which I found highly ironic since you said that your parents paid for your education. In that post, you said nothing about your mother growing up poor and working her way up the economic mountain. Good on her, I have a great deal of respect for those who are able to do that. You also said nothing about the guy two cubes down from you who came from india in that post and I equally appreciate his tenacity. If your mother or the fella a couple of cubes down would have made the same aguments you made in your initial post, their comments would have had credibility. The problem I had with that post was that you weren't one of the people who you said we all should be. Your parents paid for your education but you think that everyone else ought to suck it up and work their way to the top. Someone in your position (and understand I only read that one post) should not have such a strong opionion that so far away from the reality of his own experience and impose it on the rest of us. I found the content of that one post so distasteful that I didn't read any of your other posts, so you'll forgive me if I don't friend you on Facebook just to hang on your every thought. So, you see it isn't really about reading comprehension, it is that I found your initial thoughts on this topic so hypocritical that I wasn't going to listen to anything else you had to say because it simply wasn't credible. Maybe a softer touch that explains your view more thoughouly from the begining would ease your frustrations that people haven't listened to what you were saying in subsequent posts. As to the tables you posted, I believe what I see with my eyes. I know people who have lost their jobs over the past few years who are now working two or three jobs to even approach what they were making. These are good people who are far more worse off than they have ever been and the more time passes, the worse it gets. I'm going to look at the world with my eyes open and let what I see inform my thoughts. But, I guess you can look at a table you found on the internet and use it to tell me I'm wrong if you'd like.

I'm not so sure he is being hypocritical when it's obvious that someone in his family had to work hard to get where they are to pay for his education. You want him to say no to his parents money?

Like I said in a previous post of mine, you work hard so that the next generation of your family may be better off.

 

[IrishLax]

You know, I started reading this thread last night and read several posts I was uncomfortable with, but not inspired me to respond until I came to the one of yours that I responded to ... the one about how you always joke about how you are in the top 1%, which I found highly ironic since you said that your parents paid for your education. In that post, you said nothing about your mother growing up poor and working her way up the economic mountain. Good on her, I have a great deal of respect for those who are able to do that. You also said nothing about the guy two cubes down from you who came from india in that post and I equally appreciate his tenacity. If your mother or the fella a couple of cubes down would have made the same aguments you made in your initial post, their comments would have had credibility. The problem I had with that post was that you weren't one of the people who you said we all should be. Your parents paid for your education but you think that everyone else ought to suck it up and work their way to the top. Someone in your position (and understand I only read that one post) should not have such a strong opionion that so far away from the reality of his own experience and impose it on the rest of us. I found the content of that one post so distasteful that I didn't read any of your other posts, so you'll forgive me if I don't friend you on Facebook just to hang on your every thought. So, you see it isn't really about reading comprehension, it is that I found your initial thoughts on this topic so hypocritical that I wasn't going to listen to anything else you had to say because it simply wasn't credible. Maybe a softer touch that explains your view more thoughouly from the begining would ease your frustrations that I haven't listened to what you were saying in subsequent posts. As to the tables you posted, I believe what I see with my eyes. I know people who have lost their jobs over the past few years who are now working two or three jobs to even approach what they were making. These are good people who are far more worse off than they have ever been and the more time passes, the worse it gets. I'm going to look at the world with my eyes open and let what I see inform my thoughts. But, I guess you can look at a table you found on the internet and use it to tell me I'm wrong if you'd like.

The parts I bolded are exactly what is wrong with America right now:
1. People not listening to other people and writing them off.
2. People ignoring facts and focusing on anecdotal evidence and/or just deciding they're going to believe what they want and not listen to anything that might be to the contrary.

 

[BobD]

And I feel that a lot of this can be put on parenting.

I think this country runs on families which isn't a bad thing necessarily (except in politics where it becomes a cesspool of particular families' ideas.)

It takes one generation to change things for your family though.

Decided I would mix things up a bit.

Don't get me started on families. I think one of the single biggest disasters in America has been the destruction of the family and the dilution of family values.

 

[IrishLax]

Actually, no. It isn't wrong. I'm not sure what you posted earlier, but I can tell you that his point does not lack for factual support:

You're 100% right, I was wrong. I was looking at wealth, the post clearly said income. Although, to be honest, income is largely irrelevant. You could make $100 million and if someone taxes all of it or you lose it or something you have $0 in your pocket. The appropriate thing to look at is wealth to see what people "have" or "have not" and in this case you can clearly see that the amount wealth maintained by the top 1% has fluctuated over time and is less now than under Clinton.

Who Rules America: Wealth, Income, and Power

EDIT: see Table 3 for percentage of wealth throughout time.

 

[BeauBenken]

Don't get me started on families. I think one of the single biggest disasters in America has been the destruction of the family and the dilution of family values.

That's exactly what I want to do.

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/ZzlgJ-SfKYE" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

 

[Rhode Irish]

You're 100% right, I was wrong. I was looking at wealth, the post clearly said income. Although, to be honest, income is largely irrelevant. You could make $100 million and if someone taxes all of it or you lose it or something you have $0 in your pocket. The appropriate thing to look at is wealth to see what people "have" or "have not" and in this case you can clearly see that the amount wealth maintained by the top 1% has fluctuated over time and is less now than under Clinton.

Who Rules America: Wealth, Income, and Power

OK, fine. But that is a straw man because the effective tax rates for the wealthiest Americans have not been as low as they are now since WWII. If anything, the working class is shouldering a greater burden of revenue generation through the payroll tax:

 

[IrishJayhawk]

You're 100% right, I was wrong. I was looking at wealth, the post clearly said income. Although, to be honest, income is largely irrelevant. You could make $100 million and if someone taxes all of it or you lose it or something you have $0 in your pocket. The appropriate thing to look at is wealth to see what people "have" or "have not" and in this case you can clearly see that the amount wealth maintained by the top 1% has fluctuated over time and is less now than under Clinton.

Who Rules America: Wealth, Income, and Power

EDIT: see Table 3 for percentage of wealth throughout time.

The massive disparity started with the corporate deregulation of the Reagan era. Clinton, to a certain extent, continued that trend. These are 30 year trends...and it coincides with the neo-con movement.

 

[IrishLax]

OK, fine. But that is a straw man because the effective tax rates for the wealthiest Americans have not been as low as they are now since WWII:

Right, but they still aren't getting richer as compared to the other 99%. How do you explain that? Serious question, I don't understand it myself. Don't even really have a great guess.

 

[BeauBenken]

You're 100% right, I was wrong. I was looking at wealth, the post clearly said income. Although, to be honest, income is largely irrelevant. You could make $100 million and if someone taxes all of it or you lose it or something you have $0 in your pocket. The appropriate thing to look at is wealth to see what people "have" or "have not" and in this case you can clearly see that the amount wealth maintained by the top 1% has fluctuated over time and is less now than under Clinton.

Who Rules America: Wealth, Income, and Power

EDIT: see Table 3 for percentage of wealth throughout time.

From your source, is it me or does this disagree with the table you pointed out?

Edit: Oh wait, top 20%...still. That doesn't look good.

 

[Rhode Irish]

I just want to point out that I am not against wealth. I wouldn't want to live in a country where generating and/or accumulating wealth was discouraged or outlawed. I'm not against capitalism and free markets, I just think there has to be some constraints and regulations in order to keep the game fair for all of the participants. I'm not a socialist, but I do think we have a moral obligation as a rich society to provide a floor (or a safety net, however you want to look at it) for the least fortunate of our brothers and sisters. I don't want to redistribute wealth by taking all of a rich person's money and turning around and handing a check to a poor person, but to the extent that "redistributing wealth" means to shift the burden of financing our societal goals to those most capable of handling it, I do want to redistribute wealth. Especially since the wealthiest among us have unquestionably benefited the most from the government endeavors that our tax dollars fund.

 

[BobD]

OK, fine. But that is a straw man because the effective tax rates for the wealthiest Americans have not been as low as they are now since WWII. If anything, the working class is shouldering a greater burden of revenue generation through the payroll tax:

I do agree that everyone should pay their fair share.

Where would we find information on other revenue the US government receives from import tax, fee's and duty or things like fuel and tabacco?

 

[BeauBenken]

I just want to point out that I am not against wealth. I wouldn't want to live in a country where generating and/or accumulating wealth was discouraged or outlawed. I'm not against capitalism and free markets, I just think there has to be some constraints and regulations in order to keep the game fair for all of the participants. I'm not a socialist, but I do think we have a moral obligation as a rich society to provide a floor (or a safety net, however you want to look at it) for the least fortunate of our brothers and sisters. I don't want to redistribute wealth by taking all of a rich person's money and turning around and handing a check to a poor person, but to the extent that "redistributing wealth" means to shift the burden of financing our societal goals to those most capable of handling it, I do want to redistribute wealth. Especially since the wealthiest among us have unquestionably benefited the most from the government endeavors that our tax dollars fund.

Very well said.

 

[pkt77242]

What crap. While there are many single parents or lower income families that work hard and barely make ends meet, generally the wealthier work harder than the poor. This article summarizes some of the research on the topic. Do the Rich Work Harder? - The Wealth Report - WSJ

Further, the average worker has more leisure time than the past, with those gains concentrated on the lower income scales. So, if anything, things are getting easier (on the whole). Of course, plenty of poeple are suffering, but let's deal with the facts.

Finally, why does income inequality matter? The average or median person today is insanely wealthy compared to someone fifty years ago. The single biggest health problem for the poor is OBESITY, not hunger. Many poor people have 2 or more cars, flatscreens, etc. Why does it matter if the richer people have $500 million or $1 billion? It doesn't and shouldn't.

That is probably wrong, as wages have been stagnant for at least 20 years for the 90% of people. No I don't have statistics for 50 years but in the last 20-30 the middle class is actually makes less in inflation adjusted dollars. So that would put a huge damper on being insanely wealthy in comparison.

How the middle class became the underclass - Feb. 16, 2011

 

[dshans]

Very true, sorry, I should have said protesters, not hippies. Please except my apologies.

Peace.

Grammar issues aside, I'll accept your apology and not except it. Hippies of all ages are grateful, if not dead.

Peace, Love & Grooviness.

 

[BobD]

Grammar issues aside, I'll accept your apology and not except it. Hippies of all ages are grateful, if not dead.

Peace, Love & Grooviness.

Doh! Geez, that was a pretty bad oops. Thanks for catching it, the correction has been made.