Busybody
We are ALL BUSYBODY!
- Joined
- Jan 23, 2011
- Posts
- 55,323
thread OVAH!
Why income inequality is America’s biggest (and most difficult) problem
- Thread starter KingOrfeo
- Start date
thread OVAH!
You keep asking, so here's my answer. The Democrats tend to throw more crumbs to the unwashed masses than do the Republicans, and it's amazing what a few well placed crumbs can accomplish.
BotanyBoy
Fuck Your Safe Space
- Joined
- Jun 28, 2012
- Posts
- 52,256
Because you keep refusing to answer.
I didn't ask for a political action evaluation.
What I asked is...If you had to which one would you choose? (D) syphilis? OR (R)...AIDS?
Well??
Because you keep refusing to answer.
I didn't ask for a political action evaluation.
What I asked is...If you had to which one would you choose? (D) syphilis? OR (R)...AIDS?
Well??
What is it about neither that has you confused? I'm fed up with both. And for your next reiteration, I don't have to choose between them, so I'm not going to do so.
BotanyBoy
Fuck Your Safe Space
- Joined
- Jun 28, 2012
- Posts
- 52,256
What is it about the hypothetical 'what if you had to choose' that has you confused?
I'm also fed up with both, that's why I don't bother to vote.
I know you don't...so we are in the same boat, politically not giving a fuck.
What is it about the hypothetical 'what if you had to choose' that has you confused?
I'm also fed up with both, that's why I don't bother to vote.
I know you don't...so we are in the same boat, politically not giving a fuck.
If I decide to vote this time, which I may just so no one can say I don't have the right to complain since I didn't vote, it will be strictly for third party candidates. I realize it won't make a damn bit of difference in the outcome, but I also realize it won't really make a damn bit of difference no matter how I vote.
BotanyBoy
Fuck Your Safe Space
- Joined
- Jun 28, 2012
- Posts
- 52,256
3rd party? LOL so you're really not participating, but want to pretend that you did....that's cool! I like to wave my M'uricuh flag now and then too.
http://static2.fjcdn.com/comments/Merica+to+the+max+_16307000837e2c6c03790c6753acad4b.jpghttp://s2.quickmeme.com/img/1d/1d14412b2cdf98d99016d32d0e339ec4d36fa297520d4ba31c57076d73b5b1ea.jpghttp://media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/45/94/b8/4594b8cb7ab363df9fbb46e36dad07ed.jpghttp://www.collector-actionfigures.com/static/media/uploads/ScreamingEagle2.jpg
IF you live in a purple spot it COULD make a difference....but let's be real, odds are you either live in a pretty blue area or a pretty red one.
The_Trouvere
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2008
- Posts
- 11,189
John D. Rockefeller did more to save the whales than all the environmental groups
in the world combined.
Last edited:
The_Trouvere
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2008
- Posts
- 11,189
Have you ever had a job?
RobDownSouth
BoycotDivestSanctio
- Joined
- Apr 13, 2002
- Posts
- 78,386
Such is a drawback of livin' in a democracy, sometimes you have to go with the least objectionable choice.
Guess what? Even if someone lives in a purple state their one vote won't make a difference. And yes, I mean that to have more than one meaning.
The_Trouvere
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2008
- Posts
- 11,189
The American free enterprise system is devolving into casino capitalism. The odds
favor the house. The standard of living for most Americans declines as the rich get
richer.
Fortunately, there are alternatives in addition to what is developing in the United
States, and what existed in the Soviet Union, especially under Joseph Stalin. My
choice is social democracy.
What is developing in the United States is not "traditional America." In the past
during periods of high economic inequality the standard of living for most Americns
still increased. That is not happening now.
Last edited:
Me and Thomas Jefferson, then; see below.
And you will of course agree that is a good thing, so far as it goes.
Fine, fine, just so long as they're all lefties -- Green, Socialist, WFP, etc. They won't get elected, of course, but at least your vote will help make their parties just a bit more credible, and you won't be doing the country any actual harm, as you would be if you voted Constitution or Libertarian or America First and made their parties a bit more credible.
No, I actually think that may be a bad thing, ultimately. It keeps the pot from boiling over, and the lid on the pot, which is all the wealthy Democrats are actually concerned about, in my opinion. Just making it seem like they aren't the greedy bastards they really are is their true goal.
U
unregistered
Guest
My one vote won't make any of them more credible. At least I realize that.
Indeed it has devolved into crony capitalism, but the relevant past there would be America's own Gilded Age, or the Roaring '20s, and not any of the foreign examples you might be thinking of.
If not your one vote, then whose one vote?
Nobody's. That's the grand joke of it all. There are 538 members of Congress, for example. You get to vote for two, at most, often only one. One seat in the House, out of 438, and perhaps one seat in the Senate, out of a hundred. You don't have a say about any of the rest, and unless your one vote is the difference between the one or two candidates you do vote for winning or losing, which is almost an impossibility, it doesn't mean a damn thing who you vote for.
The_Trouvere
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2008
- Posts
- 11,189
Three Reasons for the Growth in Economic Inequality
There have been three major reasons for the increase in economic inequality.
The only one liberals want to discuss is the first. Since the inauguration of
Ronald Reagan in 1981 the tax system has become flatter, the minimum wage
and unemployment compensation have lost value to inflation, and labor unions
have become weaker.
The Republican Party, of course, is responsible for each of these reasons.
Nevertheless, most white blue collar workers vote Republican. This is because,
with good reason, they do not trust the Democratic Party on racial issues. They
are harmed by the Democratic policies of affirmative action and forced school
busing. They are also harmed by black crime. Blacks have a rate of violent crime
that is over seven times the white rate.
White blue collar workers are also harmed by the Democratic support for
easing restrictions on immigration. Immigrants compete with white blue collar
workers for jobs. Hispanics have lower crime rates than blacks, but higher
rates than whites. Even Orientals, with their lower crime rates, compete for
jobs. They do so effectively with their higher average IQ's and educational
levels.
This brings me to the second reason for the increase in economic inequality.
Computer technology increases the rewards for superior intelligence, while
reducing the economic value of job skills that those of below average
intelligence, or even average intelligence are able to learn.
Liberals do not like to think about this. They would rather pretend that IQ
tests do not measure anything of value, that intelligence can be increased by
the right environment, that there are no innate average racial intelligence
differences, and so on.
I have already touched on the third reason for income inequality. A high rate of
immigration has an inflationary effect on prices, and a deflationary effect on
wages. Consequently, it raises profits.
Liberals do not want to think about this either. They like to think about the
following poem on the Statue of Liberty:
“Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed, to me:
I lift my lamp beside the golden door.”
― Emma Lazarus
Until Democrats realize that white blue collar workers have had good reasons
to leave the Democratic Party, Democrats will not be able to address the
growing income gap.
There have been three major reasons for the increase in economic inequality.
The only one liberals want to discuss is the first. Since the inauguration of
Ronald Reagan in 1981 the tax system has become flatter, the minimum wage
and unemployment compensation have lost value to inflation, and labor unions
have become weaker.
The Republican Party, of course, is responsible for each of these reasons.
Nevertheless, most white blue collar workers vote Republican. This is because,
with good reason, they do not trust the Democratic Party on racial issues. They
are harmed by the Democratic policies of affirmative action and forced school
busing. They are also harmed by black crime. Blacks have a rate of violent crime
that is over seven times the white rate.
White blue collar workers are also harmed by the Democratic support for
easing restrictions on immigration. Immigrants compete with white blue collar
workers for jobs. Hispanics have lower crime rates than blacks, but higher
rates than whites. Even Orientals, with their lower crime rates, compete for
jobs. They do so effectively with their higher average IQ's and educational
levels.
This brings me to the second reason for the increase in economic inequality.
Computer technology increases the rewards for superior intelligence, while
reducing the economic value of job skills that those of below average
intelligence, or even average intelligence are able to learn.
Liberals do not like to think about this. They would rather pretend that IQ
tests do not measure anything of value, that intelligence can be increased by
the right environment, that there are no innate average racial intelligence
differences, and so on.
I have already touched on the third reason for income inequality. A high rate of
immigration has an inflationary effect on prices, and a deflationary effect on
wages. Consequently, it raises profits.
Liberals do not want to think about this either. They like to think about the
following poem on the Statue of Liberty:
“Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed, to me:
I lift my lamp beside the golden door.”
― Emma Lazarus
Until Democrats realize that white blue collar workers have had good reasons
to leave the Democratic Party, Democrats will not be able to address the
growing income gap.
Last edited:
The_Trouvere
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2008
- Posts
- 11,189
Most of these makers are making pay checks that buy less than they did when
Bill Clinton was president.
Many of these takers are stock holders who benefit from the fact that the results
economic growth that used to go into pay checks now go into dividend payments.
The_Trouvere
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2008
- Posts
- 11,189
To the extent that this has happened, it has happened because of the growth
in political contributions by rich people and corporations. This is a problem
Democrats would like to solve with restrictions on political contributions.
I would like to remove the importance of money in politics by prohibiting all
contributions to politicians, and by instituting government financing of political
campaigns. This is used in many democracies. It works well.
Similar threads
