Why Don't We Focus on Wealth Distribution in America?

[Chris_Michael]

America has a terrible wealth distribution problem, and nobody is talking about it. The rich is carried by the working poor AND the middle class. The middle class is shrinking severely.

This is a big fucking problem. Obviously, it's getting way worse and a Hillary 2016 presidential election would not have curved that at all. I want to emphasize that. This problem would be present regardless of whether Hillary or Trump won, and a Hillary victory would have been seen as a victory for the working poor when in reality, it would have been a victory for the rich just like any other presidency.

Why is it so difficult for Americans to come together and say we hate the wealth distribution? I think this is where we see the branching of Center Left and Far Left. The Center Left seems to argue that point precisely. The Far Left takes a very odd turn. It argues that there's an inherent agenda of a certain race, gender/sex, or age. So, for instance...

"Women make less than men."
"Blacks make less than whites."
"Women cannot receive the healthcare they need."
"Blacks cannot receive the healthcare they need."

The message that sends is that the problem isn't that the rich are stomping on the working poor, but rather that the white man is stomping on women. It sends the message that white people inherently hate black people, when in reality it's just that the rich doesn't give a shit about the poor.

You see, if somebody were to say to me, "Chris, Donald Trump is an arrogant rich douchebag and he doesn't give a shit about the working middle class nor the working poor," I'd fully agree. HOWEVER, if you substitute Hillary Clinton with Donald Trump, I'd agree equally. The Far Left has an issue with that. Instead of seeing that as an opinion I have, which is different from theirs, they would say that I'm a misogynist. They would say that I don't want to see a woman in office.

That is the breaking point, and the absolute reason why somebody who is Center Left (me) fights so harshly against the Far Left, who thinks that Hillary Clinton would have been a victory for the working poor and middle class.

In my eyes, there is no difference between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump in terms of wealth distribution. Does that mean that Donald Trump is NOT racist, sexist, etc.? No. He very well may be.

Essentially, you are fighting the very same people who would be on your side if you just made the point that the rich are fucking the poor in the ass. However, I'm not going to side with somebody who says that white men hate black people and women. Why would I? You're basically shooting yourself in the foot by trying to argue that.

One would argue, "Well Chris, why don't you get over your pride for the betterment of the nation and just go along with being called a racist, misogynist, transphobic, ablist, Nazi"? Because who the fuck would?! I now follow the thought process of the slippery slope, which is a fallacy, that if you give 'em an inch, they'll take a mile.

I'm not really going to say much about Islam, though that's yet another sticking point. It's already been discussed, and is currently being discussed in another thread. But that is just another way for the Far Left to call an entire race and sex/gender bigots. There is no logical reason to be accepting of ANY religion at all, whatsoever, period. It should NOT govern our people. Not the one in place now, and certainly not one from another country.

Seriously, we fight ourselves and enjoy presidential elections like a Pay-Per-View fight. But in the end, big business and the rich are the only true victors. They all have healthcare, they all have their education paid for, and their future offspring have the best seat in the house.

The next time you think about Trump, why don't you think about who's going to be president in 2020? Why don't you focus on Democrats? Forget the Republicans. Forget the Trumptards, including me, and focus on who you want sitting in the Oval Office in 2020. Because otherwise, you may end up with four more years of your current nightmare. "Oh no way that's going to happen." Yeah, that's what you and all news outlets were saying in early-mid 2016, too.

 

[JackLuis]

Congress doesn't want anyone redistributing their wealth.

 

[Carnal_Flower]

Stop blaming everyone but yourself.

Hillary said many times, "I'm going to raise taxes on the wealthiest." Over and over. Said it right out loud in the debates. That is the PRIMARY reason they convinced all you Dumb Fucks she's the Devil. You have your head up your ass.

America has a terrible wealth distribution problem, and nobody is talking about it. The rich is carried by the working poor AND the middle class. The middle class is shrinking severely.

This is a big fucking problem. Obviously, it's getting way worse and a Hillary 2016 presidential election would not have curved that at all. I want to emphasize that. This problem would be present regardless of whether Hillary or Trump won, and a Hillary victory would have been seen as a victory for the working poor when in reality, it would have been a victory for the rich just like any other presidency.

Why is it so difficult for Americans to come together and say we hate the wealth distribution? I think this is where we see the branching of Center Left and Far Left. The Center Left seems to argue that point precisely. The Far Left takes a very odd turn. It argues that there's an inherent agenda of a certain race, gender/sex, or age. So, for instance...

"Women make less than men."
"Blacks make less than whites."
"Women cannot receive the healthcare they need."
"Blacks cannot receive the healthcare they need."

The message that sends is that the problem isn't that the rich are stomping on the working poor, but rather that the white man is stomping on women. It sends the message that white people inherently hate black people, when in reality it's just that the rich doesn't give a shit about the poor.

You see, if somebody were to say to me, "Chris, Donald Trump is an arrogant rich douchebag and he doesn't give a shit about the working middle class nor the working poor," I'd fully agree. HOWEVER, if you substitute Hillary Clinton with Donald Trump, I'd agree equally. The Far Left has an issue with that. Instead of seeing that as an opinion I have, which is different from theirs, they would say that I'm a misogynist. They would say that I don't want to see a woman in office.

That is the breaking point, and the absolute reason why somebody who is Center Left (me) fights so harshly against the Far Left, who thinks that Hillary Clinton would have been a victory for the working poor and middle class.

In my eyes, there is no difference between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump in terms of wealth distribution. Does that mean that Donald Trump is NOT racist, sexist, etc.? No. He very well may be.

Essentially, you are fighting the very same people who would be on your side if you just made the point that the rich are fucking the poor in the ass. However, I'm not going to side with somebody who says that white men hate black people and women. Why would I? You're basically shooting yourself in the foot by trying to argue that.

One would argue, "Well Chris, why don't you get over your pride for the betterment of the nation and just go along with being called a racist, misogynist, transphobic, ablist, Nazi"? Because who the fuck would?! I now follow the thought process of the slippery slope, which is a fallacy, that if you give 'em an inch, they'll take a mile.

I'm not really going to say much about Islam, though that's yet another sticking point. It's already been discussed, and is currently being discussed in another thread. But that is just another way for the Far Left to call an entire race and sex/gender bigots. There is no logical reason to be accepting of ANY religion at all, whatsoever, period. It should NOT govern our people. Not the one in place now, and certainly not one from another country.

Seriously, we fight ourselves and enjoy presidential elections like a Pay-Per-View fight. But in the end, big business and the rich are the only true victors. They all have healthcare, they all have their education paid for, and their future offspring have the best seat in the house.

The next time you think about Trump, why don't you think about who's going to be president in 2020? Why don't you focus on Democrats? Forget the Republicans. Forget the Trumptards, including me, and focus on who you want sitting in the Oval Office in 2020. Because otherwise, you may end up with four more years of your current nightmare. "Oh no way that's going to happen." Yeah, that's what you and all news outlets were saying in early-mid 2016, too.

 

[coachdb18]

From each according to his abilities...
To each according to his needs? - K. Marx

 

[BotanyBoy]

Congress doesn't want anyone redistributing their wealth.

Isn't government wonderful!!! Yay socialism!!!


LOL.....

Wealth inequality in the US is a direct result of government market mongering.

 

[TheWhiteBull]

Stop blaming everyone but yourself.

Hillary said many times, "I'm going to raise taxes on the wealthiest." Over and over. Said it right out loud in the debates. That is the PRIMARY reason they convinced all you Dumb Fucks she's the Devil. You have your head up your ass.

Seeing as his OP was basically a rant against the rich Im not sure how that is what would have convinced her shes evil.

 

[handysr]

Stop blaming everyone but yourself.

Hillary said many times, "I'm going to raise taxes on the wealthiest." Over and over. Said it right out loud in the debates. That is the PRIMARY reason they convinced all you Dumb Fucks she's the Devil. You have your head up your ass.

The clintoncunt hates everyone but herself and inner circle. She doesn't give a damn about the rest. Trump may not be ideal, but he's light years ahead of that cunt.

There is no way that weasel would have cut taxes on the non-1%ers. But why punish the rich for being rich? And for what purpose? Where would that extra money go? Why say that. It not say reduce the tax for the middle class?

 

[Chris_Michael]

From each according to his abilities...
To each according to his needs? - K. Marx

The working class works just as hard if not harder than the rich. The rich ironically get way more free handouts than the poor. Those in Congress probably have the best benefits package that we can dream of yet the working poor can't even afford to pay for health insurance. School loans are out of control yet society teaches children that if they don't go to college, then they are failures. And most importantly, as I have pointed out many times before, people are dying with an average of $65,000 in debt.

Saying "Marxism" is the Conservative's Race Card. It's just a way to shut down the conversation, and it's a way to turn a blind eye to the situation.

The point is, you're getting fucked in the ass by the rich... unless you are rich. The rich aren't ABLE. They are FORTUNATE. If you put any rich CEO in a blue collar job, he would probably shit his pants.

 

[Chris_Michael]

Stop blaming everyone but yourself.

Hillary said many times, "I'm going to raise taxes on the wealthiest." Over and over. Said it right out loud in the debates. That is the PRIMARY reason they convinced all you Dumb Fucks she's the Devil. You have your head up your ass.

It has come to this, has it?

http://s2.quickmeme.com/img/f9/f9d031e5ece3cef14379307bdb0293e61225f697833f4223c093a18c6a0d066a.jpg

 

[Chris_Michael]

Seeing as his OP was basically a rant against the rich Im not sure how that is what would have convinced her shes evil.

She's just pissed off because I voted for Trump and I don't regret it. She's going to continue this forever. She'll never let it go. It bugs her so badly that she constantly tells me never to vote again.

It's funny that these Far Left ideologues think this way. I'm not sure if she's a minority who benefits from using the bigot card or if she's just an idiot. But there is some kind of bias there.

 

[Chris_Michael]

From each according to his abilities...
To each according to his needs? - K. Marx

Here's a great example of a free handout by the government. "To each according to his greedy desires?"

Christie lounges with family on beach at park he shut down

Yahoo!News

TRENTON, N.J. (AP) -- Gov. Chris Christie spent part of Sunday lounging with his family on a beach at a state park he ordered closed to the public amid a government shutdown that showed little sign of ending.

The unpopular Republican governor, whose family was using the state residence at Island Beach State Park for the weekend, said later Sunday at a news conference in Trenton that he flew on a state helicopter to the residence.

"That's where my family is sleeping so that's where I'll sleep," he said. "When I have a choice between sleeping with my family or sleeping alone, I generally like to sleep where my family is."

The governor was photographed by NJ.com sitting with his family on a beach chair in sandals and a T-shirt before flying to talk to reporters in Trenton, where he worked without result to end the shutdown.

During the news conference, Christie was asked if he had gotten any sun that day, to which he said he didn't, NJ.com reported. The governor's spokesman agreed that Christie didn't get any sun; he said Christie was wearing a baseball hat.

Christie defended his use of the state property during the shutdown that affected the public, which is being kept out of state parks with signs blaming Democratic Assembly Speaker Vincent Prieto, on Saturday, saying: "That's the way it goes. Run for governor, and you can have the residence."

Christie said Sunday that he's "frustrated" by the shutdown and is open to making a deal to reopen government.

Few lawmakers were around the statehouse Sunday, and Christie said that unless he sent state police to retrieve them he could not force them to be there.

Christie, for at least the second time, referred to himself as "Mr. Reasonable" and said he would consider the Democratic budget along with legislation to overhaul the state's biggest health insurer, Horizon Blue Cross Blue Shield. Or without the Horizon legislation he has called for, he would line item veto about $350 million of the Democratic priorities.

"It should end today. Send me a budget," he said. "I'm ready to work, but I can't work if I don't have any money. These guys have to get their act together."

Also on Sunday, Democratic Senate President Steve Sweeney, who's allied with Christie, called for a meeting with lawmakers and Horizon's CEO to try to hash out a way forward.

Horizon said CEO Bob Marino would attend. Horizon opposes Christie and Sweeney's proposal.

Christie also said he would order the Legislature to return Monday after ordering it to do so Saturday and Sunday.

Democrats are splintered over the impasse, with Prieto opposed to the plan and Sweeney in favor.

The term-limited governor blames the shutdown on Prieto, who continues to hold open a vote on the Assembly floor on the $34.7 billion budget that remains deadlocked with 27 yes votes, shy of the 41 needed to succeed. Democrats who are abstaining say they worry about Christie line item vetoing education funding from the budget.

Christie ordered the shutdown of nonessential state services, like parks and motor vehicle offices, on Friday after he and lawmakers failed to agree on terms.

Christie had demanded that lawmakers pass Senate-approved legislation to make over Horizon Blue Cross Blue Shield, but on Sunday said he'd reopen the government under either scenario.

Prieto has said he's concerned about tweaking the state's biggest insurer when congressional Republicans and President Donald Trump are contemplating overhauling the Affordable Care Act.

Over the weekend, the public began feeling the effects of the shutdown.

Among those affected were Cub Scouts forced to leave a state park campsite and people trying to obtain or renew documents from the state motor vehicle commission.

Remaining open under the shutdown are New Jersey Transit, state prisons, the state police, state hospitals and treatment centers as well as casinos, race tracks and the lottery.

Liberty State Park was closed, forcing the suspension of ticket sales and ferry service from the site to the Statue of Liberty and Ellis Island. But the latter two sites remained open.

 

[Carnal_Flower]

Yes, and he says within that rant that he sees NO difference between Trump and Hillary when it comes to wealth distribution.

His rants on how evil she is are well known elsewhere

Seeing as his OP was basically a rant against the rich Im not sure how that is what would have convinced her shes evil.

 

[Carnal_Flower]

Wrong

You did say you regretted your vote, many times.

She's just pissed off because I voted for Trump and I don't regret it. She's going to continue this forever. She'll never let it go. It bugs her so badly that she constantly tells me never to vote again.

It's funny that these Far Left ideologues think this way. I'm not sure if she's a minority who benefits from using the bigot card or if she's just an idiot. But there is some kind of bias there.

 

[handysr]

Yes, and he says within that rant that he sees NO difference between Trump and Hillary when it comes to wealth distribution.

His rants on how evil she is are well known elsewhere

And he's not wrong in either of your statements.

 

[Carnal_Flower]

Tax Policy is a major difference between Trump and Hillary.

It's nice and simple, only five letters: TAXES

Do you need it tattooed on your ass?

And he's not wrong in either of your statements.

 

[TheWhiteBull]

Yes, and he says within that rant that he sees NO difference between Trump and Hillary when it comes to wealth distribution.

His rants on how evil she is are well known elsewhere

So is it unreasonable to conclude that he then doesnt believe Hilary's claims about what she would do? I dont believe a single thing she claims because she has an easily observable history of saying what seems popular at the time (like any politician). Trump on the other hand just blurts out whatever turd of a thought ia in his head at the time.

 

[magicalmoments]

America has a terrible wealth distribution problem, and nobody is talking about it. The rich is carried by the working poor AND the middle class. The middle class is shrinking severely.

This is a big fucking problem. Obviously, it's getting way worse and a Hillary 2016 presidential election would not have curved that at all. I want to emphasize that. This problem would be present regardless of whether Hillary or Trump won, and a Hillary victory would have been seen as a victory for the working poor when in reality, it would have been a victory for the rich just like any other presidency.

Why is it so difficult for Americans to come together and say we hate the wealth distribution? I think this is where we see the branching of Center Left and Far Left. The Center Left seems to argue that point precisely. The Far Left takes a very odd turn. It argues that there's an inherent agenda of a certain race, gender/sex, or age. So, for instance...

"Women make less than men."
"Blacks make less than whites."
"Women cannot receive the healthcare they need."
"Blacks cannot receive the healthcare they need."

The message that sends is that the problem isn't that the rich are stomping on the working poor, but rather that the white man is stomping on women. It sends the message that white people inherently hate black people, when in reality it's just that the rich doesn't give a shit about the poor.

You see, if somebody were to say to me, "Chris, Donald Trump is an arrogant rich douchebag and he doesn't give a shit about the working middle class nor the working poor," I'd fully agree. HOWEVER, if you substitute Hillary Clinton with Donald Trump, I'd agree equally. The Far Left has an issue with that. Instead of seeing that as an opinion I have, which is different from theirs, they would say that I'm a misogynist. They would say that I don't want to see a woman in office.

That is the breaking point, and the absolute reason why somebody who is Center Left (me) fights so harshly against the Far Left, who thinks that Hillary Clinton would have been a victory for the working poor and middle class.

In my eyes, there is no difference between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump in terms of wealth distribution. Does that mean that Donald Trump is NOT racist, sexist, etc.? No. He very well may be.

Essentially, you are fighting the very same people who would be on your side if you just made the point that the rich are fucking the poor in the ass. However, I'm not going to side with somebody who says that white men hate black people and women. Why would I? You're basically shooting yourself in the foot by trying to argue that.

One would argue, "Well Chris, why don't you get over your pride for the betterment of the nation and just go along with being called a racist, misogynist, transphobic, ablist, Nazi"? Because who the fuck would?! I now follow the thought process of the slippery slope, which is a fallacy, that if you give 'em an inch, they'll take a mile.

I'm not really going to say much about Islam, though that's yet another sticking point. It's already been discussed, and is currently being discussed in another thread. But that is just another way for the Far Left to call an entire race and sex/gender bigots. There is no logical reason to be accepting of ANY religion at all, whatsoever, period. It should NOT govern our people. Not the one in place now, and certainly not one from another country.

Seriously, we fight ourselves and enjoy presidential elections like a Pay-Per-View fight. But in the end, big business and the rich are the only true victors. They all have healthcare, they all have their education paid for, and their future offspring have the best seat in the house.

The next time you think about Trump, why don't you think about who's going to be president in 2020? Why don't you focus on Democrats? Forget the Republicans. Forget the Trumptards, including me, and focus on who you want sitting in the Oval Office in 2020. Because otherwise, you may end up with four more years of your current nightmare. "Oh no way that's going to happen." Yeah, that's what you and all news outlets were saying in early-mid 2016, too.

Sounds like dangerous egalitarian neo liberal psuedo regressive socialist populist radicalism to me!

 

[Carnal_Flower]

Democrats always raise taxes. Bill Clinton, did, big time, and wow, the universe did not end. Same with Obama. The U.S. has a very low tax rate compared to most wealthy nations. Ds ALWAYS want to raise taxes. It's the one thing you can count on.

I don't suffer from Hillary Derangement Syndrome, and I know her record. I am 100% confident she would have raised taxes, and never have voted for this joke of a "Health Care" Bill, which is, actually, a major theft (redistribution) of wealth from the masses to the richest 1%. Who don't need it.

So is it unreasonable to conclude that he then doesnt believe Hilary's claims about what she would do? I dont believe a single thing she claims because she has an easily observable history of saying what seems popular at the time (like any politician). Trump on the other hand just blurts out whatever turd of a thought ia in his head at the time.

 

[Libsam]

We could start by recognizing the dishonest terms bureaucrats use to keep the ever expanding entitlement votes flowing. Like, wealth distribution.

Goods and services are distributed, wealth is earned.

 

[Chris_Michael]

Wrong

You did say you regretted your vote, many times.

100% BULLSHIT

GIVE 1 EXAMPLE

 

[Chris_Michael]

Sounds like dangerous egalitarian neo liberal psuedo regressive socialist populist radicalism to me!

So, you're okay with the top 20% having 80% of the nation's currency? You're okay with this shrinking middle class? Our economy is not working.

And no, Carnal. You idiot. Hillary would not have done shit, you fucking autistic inbred lunatic.

 

[Carnal_Flower]

oh yes, you did.

Not sure, it was either when you were flipping out about religion or abortion, can't remember.

100% BULLSHIT

GIVE 1 EXAMPLE

 

[Libsam]

Another thing to understand about the dishonest use of the term wealth distribution:

The rich, middle class, and poor are not static groups. Most people start out at the bottom and over time acquire knowledge, skills, and experience to help them move up. That is called income/socioeconomic/upward mobility.

Also, wealth is not finite.

 

[magicalmoments]

So, you're okay with the top 20% having 80% of the nation's currency? You're okay with this shrinking middle class? Our economy is not working.

And no, Carnal. You idiot. Hillary would not have done shit, you fucking autistic inbred lunatic.

I was taking the piss. I agree with you that the American economy is fucked but, not living there, I don't give a fuck.

 

[DeYaKen]

To answer the original question. Governments don't talk about redistribution of wealth because we put wealthy people in power. Their campaigns are financed by wealthy people. Neither the people we elect nor those who sponsor them want to give up any of their wealth. It is almost as bad in Britain as it is in the USA.

Talk about wealth distribution and you are branded a communist, yet Japan has the lowest income gap in the world. Do we think of Japan as a communist country?
This book should be compulsory reading in all schools. It highlights the damage done to a country by inequality of income.

https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product...bb_uk-21&linkCode=as2&camp=1634&creative=6738

Many great comparisons of US states.

BTW it doesn't have to be about taxation. Places like Sweden use the tax system but in places like Japan, the equality is endemic in their society.