Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

I just wish the middle class worked hard enough to see their wealth grow as well.

Wealth inequality is now at record high levels.

The gap between the richest families in America and those on the middle and lower rungs of the economic ladder is wider than at any other point in the last 30 years — when the Fed began collecting the data Pew used for its research.
More specifically, Pew found that the wealthiest tier of Americans suffered less during the recession than others, and has made up the most ground since. By contrast, “middle-income families haven’t seen any gains,” according to Pew. Lower-income Americans actually have less wealth now than they did at any point since 1983.

http://www.buzzfeed.com/jimdalrympleii/ ... .ts3eVZ32K" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

kalm wrote:I just wish the middle class worked hard enough to see their wealth grow as well.

Wealth inequality is now at record high levels.

The gap between the richest families in America and those on the middle and lower rungs of the economic ladder is wider than at any other point in the last 30 years — when the Fed began collecting the data Pew used for its research.
More specifically, Pew found that the wealthiest tier of Americans suffered less during the recession than others, and has made up the most ground since. By contrast, “middle-income families haven’t seen any gains,” according to Pew. Lower-income Americans actually have less wealth now than they did at any point since 1983.

http://www.buzzfeed.com/jimdalrympleii/ ... .ts3eVZ32K" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

They say a bankers carcass could feed a family of four over a month.

Not that I necessarily agree but since this plays into most posting styles.


GObama

If wishes were horses beggars would ride.

OL FU wrote:Not that I necessarily agree but since this plays into most posting styles.


GObama

I had the exact thought while reading this.

CID1990 wrote:If wishes were horses beggars would ride.

What does that mean? Rising wealth for the middle and poor is in achievable at this point? Then who is going to pay for debt?

I'm still trying to figure out who to blame for all this..?

One party would have you believe that its the fault of the lazy who just can't pull themselves up because they refuse to work hard enough to get it done... (Like Grandpa did)

The other party would have you believe that the playing field has been tilted so far in one direction now that only a gigantic over inflated government can fix the problem

and frankly I think they are both wrong
Neither "Party" is capable of solving this issue

Chizzang wrote:I'm still trying to figure out who to blame for all this..?

One party would have you believe that its the fault of the lazy who just can't pull themselves up because they refuse to work hard enough to get it done... (Like Grandpa did)

The other party would have you believe that the playing field has been tilted so far in one direction now that only a gigantic over inflated government can fix the problem

and frankly I think they are both wrong
Neither "Party" is capable of solving this issue

I am at the point of wondering whether they can solve any issue

OL FU wrote:

Chizzang wrote:I'm still trying to figure out who to blame for all this..?

One party would have you believe that its the fault of the lazy who just can't pull themselves up because they refuse to work hard enough to get it done... (Like Grandpa did)

The other party would have you believe that the playing field has been tilted so far in one direction now that only a gigantic over inflated government can fix the problem

and frankly I think they are both wrong
Neither "Party" is capable of solving this issue

I am at the point of wondering whether they can solve any issue

they can solve their own retirement issues and lobby interest fairly concisely it seems ...

Chizzang wrote:

OL FU wrote:
I am at the point of wondering whether they can solve any issue

they can solve their own retirement issues and lobby interest fairly concisely it seems ...

I feel better now

Chizzang wrote:I'm still trying to figure out who to blame for all this..?

One party would have you believe that its the fault of the lazy who just can't pull themselves up because they refuse to work hard enough to get it done... (Like Grandpa did)

The other party would have you believe that the playing field has been tilted so far in one direction now that only a gigantic over inflated government can fix the problem

and frankly I think they are both wrong
Neither "Party" is capable of solving this issue

A massive economic collapse where we're shanking each other in the streets and/or a revolution might do the trick too.

kalm wrote:

Chizzang wrote:I'm still trying to figure out who to blame for all this..?

One party would have you believe that its the fault of the lazy who just can't pull themselves up because they refuse to work hard enough to get it done... (Like Grandpa did)

The other party would have you believe that the playing field has been tilted so far in one direction now that only a gigantic over inflated government can fix the problem

and frankly I think they are both wrong
Neither "Party" is capable of solving this issue

A massive economic collapse where we're shanking each other in the streets and/or a revolution might do the trick too.

That is one way to re-shuffle the deck...

The Uppercrust haven't recovered to where they were at the tail end of the Bush Administration.

Gobama!

As always: Focusing on the "gap" is stupid. It really is.

There is no basis for thinking that you'll be better off just because someone else is less well off than they are. The poor are not poor because the wealthy are wealthy.

Just curious if these numbers are adjusted for cost of living. For example a person making $50,000 in a rural community in the midwest is better off than a person making the same $50,000 in an urban environment. For instance, a house in the rural setting, that sells for $60,000, could cost upwards of $200,000 in an urban neighborhood. There are places in this country that a person can live comfortably (relative to your view), on $9000 per year and not feel like they are poor, with no external aide. Large Cites are not the place where you would be able to do that though.

I still get the point that Big Corporations, Banks, Education, etc, have over the top compensation for executive personnel.

Maybe wealthy people are smart people who manage their money well and make well thought out decisions regarding investments in order to become more wealthy. Maybe much of the middle class is more concerned with Kim Kardashians' latest selfie or who won The Voice last night.

I'm still waiting for someone to come up with a solution for this, if one exists.

GannonFan wrote:I'm still waiting for someone to come up with a solution for this, if one exists.

Valid point. The obvious one is increased wages for the working poor and middle class. But that's antithetical to business.

kalm wrote:

GannonFan wrote:I'm still waiting for someone to come up with a solution for this, if one exists.

Valid point. The obvious one is increased wages for the working poor and middle class. But that's antithetical to business.

Most businesses aren't around for altruistic purposes and will always minimize costs and maximize revenues. This really isn't a secret.

If you don't think you're paid enough, then (a) increase your skill set via on the job training or additional education, (b) change companies, or (c) both of the above.

ASUG8 wrote:

kalm wrote:
Valid point. The obvious one is increased wages for the working poor and middle class. But that's antithetical to business.

Most businesses aren't around for altruistic purposes and will always minimize costs and maximize revenues. This really isn't a secret.

If you don't think you're paid enough, then (a) increase your skill set via on the job training or additional education, (b) change companies, or (c) both of the above.

No shit?

So what happens if the all of the poor and middle class do exactly as you suggest? Where will we find the ditch diggers?

kalm wrote:

ASUG8 wrote:
Most businesses aren't around for altruistic purposes and will always minimize costs and maximize revenues. This really isn't a secret.

If you don't think you're paid enough, then (a) increase your skill set via on the job training or additional education, (b) change companies, or (c) both of the above.

No shit?

So what happens if the all of the poor and middle class do exactly as you suggest? Where will we find the ditch diggers?

The world will always need ditch diggers. It's a cold hard truth.

Look at what unions did to American manufacturing in recent decades (I think they had their place in the early 20th century, but lost relevance afterward ). Northern manufacturing moved south to take advantage of right-to-work states, then moved to Mexico for lower wages, then on to China. I wish there was some way to pay everyone a living wage and not lose our manufacturing base to lower cost countries, but you know as well as I do that's exactly what would happen.

ASUG8 wrote:

kalm wrote:
No shit?

So what happens if the all of the poor and middle class do exactly as you suggest? Where will we find the ditch diggers?

The world will always need ditch diggers. It's a cold hard truth.

Look at what unions did to American manufacturing in recent decades (I think they had their place in the early 20th century, but lost relevance afterward ). Northern manufacturing moved south to take advantage of right-to-work states, then moved to Mexico for lower wages, then on to China. I wish there was some way to pay everyone a living wage and not lose our manufacturing base to lower cost countries, but you know as well as I do that's exactly what would happen.

I know the world needs ditch diggers…that's why I mentioned it.

All I'm pointing out is that if we want to reduce the size of government, have less people on government assistance, and get the bottom 47% paying federal income tax, then folks need to get paid more. As Chizzy likes to point out, it's a pretty cozy arrangement for the top earners right now.

We make a choice to let jobs go away. We do it through our trade and tax policies and we do it as consumers. Not that any of those things will change but they are all choices we make.

So I'm tipping my hat to you and Gannon.

kalm wrote:

GannonFan wrote:I'm still waiting for someone to come up with a solution for this, if one exists.

Valid point. The obvious one is increased wages for the working poor and middle class. But that's antithetical to business.

Off-shore manufacturing and technical staff has reduced or kept the wages low, while increasing the bottom line. Executives are rewarded with high salaries and stock options for improving these bottom lines. As long as cheap labor is available outside the USA, corporations will continue to use it.

kalm wrote:

ASUG8 wrote:
The world will always need ditch diggers. It's a cold hard truth.

Look at what unions did to American manufacturing in recent decades (I think they had their place in the early 20th century, but lost relevance afterward ). Northern manufacturing moved south to take advantage of right-to-work states, then moved to Mexico for lower wages, then on to China. I wish there was some way to pay everyone a living wage and not lose our manufacturing base to lower cost countries, but you know as well as I do that's exactly what would happen.

I know the world needs ditch diggers…that's why I mentioned it.

All I'm pointing out is that if we want to reduce the size of government, have less people on government assistance, and get the bottom 47% paying federal income tax, then folks need to get paid more. As Chizzy likes to point out, it's a pretty cozy arrangement for the top earners right now.

We make a choice to let jobs go away. We do it through our trade and tax policies and we do it as consumers. Not that any of those things will change but they are all choices we make.

So I'm tipping my hat to you and Gannon.

It's not just about choices we make, that's why there isn't an easy solution to "just pay people more". We can't adjust our trade and tax policies to make that happen. It's a big world out there, and like it or not, we don't get to dictate to the whole world how things happen. There will be competition always, unless we get lucky again and have most of the industrialized world destroy itself and we're left standing after a world war. But those things don't come around too often. When it comes down to it, we need to make things that the world needs (not necessarily make, services are part of that too) and we need to make things that the rest of the world can't easily make. That's what drives economic proseperity, and in the absence of that you end up slipping towards economic malaise and stagnation. We're not there, but stale wage growth is a symptom of that and we do have that now. We can't wish these things away and it's not as easy as rewriting a policy to make it better either.

GannonFan wrote:I'm still waiting for someone to come up with a solution for this, if one exists.

There's no need for a solution unless there is a problem. People keep saying that an expanding wealth gap is a problem in itself and I think that's a false premise.

If I think I have a problem because I don't have enough wealth the problem is that I don't have enough wealth. How much wealth someone else has is irrelevant unless they got their wealth by taking something that rightfully belonged to me.

There seems to be this assumption that if, say, Wall Street bankers weren't doing as well other people would be doing better on average. That's a very questionable assumption.