-
I want to thank all the members that have upgraded your accounts. I truly appreciate your support of the site monetarily. Supporting the site keeps this site up and running as a lot of work daily goes on behind the scenes. Click to Support Signs101 ...
Income Inequality
- Thread starter Texas_Signmaker
- Start date
If you're born poor you're probably going to grow up to be poor too. Americans like to think this country is completely above that. And it might have been decades and centuries in the past. The mechanisms of our society today are devolving it into an old-world caste system. All we need left is to start crowning royalty.
Christian @ 2CT Media
Active Member
So you mean to tell me my Portuguese ancestors emigrated to Hawaii as farmers, were poor very poor and over 6 generations each of them became entrepreneurs, now we are comfortably middle class. Hell my grandfather and grand uncle designed and built the valves and pump system for one of the first heart bypass machines, the idea was then stolen and all they received was a plaque on the wall at the military hospital.
Its bull that people are stuck in their position, that's called no drive. Set forth and conquer.
This sums up the reality of the situation. People believe otherwise because there is some upward mobility in our country vs others where it is even more limited.
The biggest thing people seem not to grasp about the income inequality discussion is people still continue to believe it's about getting paid despite providing limited societal value. The idea isn't to move away from a merit based system. The idea is not to have some "winners" and some "losers". The idea is that the winners should not hoard all the wealth and oppress normal people. That is in fact what is happening. Wealth growth in the top 1-5% is insane compared to the bottom 95-99%. It's a huge huge huge difference. It's not remotely close.
But again, people will dance around this subject, for unknown reasons, and make the discussion about welfare and lazy millennials.
Except this is now how it works and not how human nature works. Not everyone can win. Not everyone can succeed. Not everyone can do well. McDonalds doesn't exist in its current form without people that are simply unsuccessful because they wouldn't have a work force.
You simply have to account for some people just doing their job with a desire to live a moderate, simple life. They go to work. Do their job. Do the right thing on a daily basis. Just want to have a family and enjoy life the best they can. They don't have the capacity for much more. These people shouldn't have to struggle to pay their bills and worry about a single illness or injury causing them to go bankrupt.
The most ironic thing is, Republicans actually campaign on a policy to fix this. It's called trickle down economics. So they're selling full on the idea of people working hard, doing a good job, the company does well, and I'll get paid. The thing is, they're selling that product but not buying it themselves. There is no intention that a hard working person at McDonalds will likely live a comfortable life. They'll always be on the brink despite McDonalds doing very well.
As a thread evolves and various new issues get discussed, it would seem to be natural for those able to respectfully discuss those variables to keep expanding the discussion. So far only two of you have turned it into your usual opportunity to turn it personal.
This thread category has no limit or moderation attached to it by anyone in the employ of Signs101.
2CT Media said:
First of all the example you bring up is from the distant past. It doesn't really apply to what is happening now. Next, the whole "the losers have no drive; set forth and conquer" pitch seems to imply everyone has the same chance at success regardless of background. We all know that's a bunch of baloney. It does make a difference who your parents were and how they raised you. It does matter where you were raised. It does matter which public schools you attended and the quality of teachers leading the classes. Those are the basic things that lead to the connections one makes to get opportunities at success. There are lots of factors that will pre-determine a person's path in life before he has made any choices himself. We don't want to admit that, especially if we're doing it in the context of waving the American flag, but that is the truth. Many bristle against concepts such as "income inequality" or "institutionalized racism" since they cut against the ideals upon which America is promoted to its own citizens and the rest of the world.
Texas_Signmaker
Very Active Signmaker
If we would follow the Bible and pass along a blessing when it is given to us then income inequality may not be as big of a problem.
I made 2 grand today lettering 3 trucks. I tipped the waitress $20 dollars on a $10 tab. Service was slow Because she had a lot of tables. She was a very hard working woman. I passed along a small blessing, I left before she saw.
I made 2 grand today lettering 3 trucks. I tipped the waitress $20 dollars on a $10 tab. Service was slow Because she had a lot of tables. She was a very hard working woman. I passed along a small blessing, I left before she saw.
Last edited:
While I applaud your act, it alone cannot negate the deeply entrenched, systematic inequities built into our economy and body politic. It also infers charity, which the vast majority of working class Americans struggling for economic justice and financial equity reject and are not seeking. Economic justice means we are all fairly compensated for the added value we generate for our employer.
As part of the fastest growing demographic in America claiming "None Of The Above" when polled about religious affiliations, I take my cues on rewarding excellent service from my own moral and ethical code, one which has an incredibly high bar.
Gino
Premium Subscriber
That doesn't sum up squat, at least not in the real world.
This is 110% the exact same method of thinking that is turning out idiots in our schools. The same thinking which has ruined good and super achievers in their quest for striving to get ahead. This thinking is so flawed, it ain't even funny and y'all talk it like it's normal. No kids left behind. Pass them, for the sake of passing them. Make sure they get good marks, we don't wanna scar lil' Jimmy's mind. Uh-uh. Do you know how many students are scored poorly, because of the H-U-U-U-GE curves they hafta grade on these days ?? Do you know how many kids are not accepted into colleges, universities and other levels of education because of the nitwits we're passing through our marbled and well built schools systems ??
You wanna get ahead. WORK at it. Don't expect others to always spoon feed your silly a$$.
I'm all for helping those who need help, but I am totally against writing a blank check for all those complaining about they've been trod upon, by whatever you wanna call it...... and I KNOW how to dance, literally.
Last edited:
Johnny Best
Active Member
In other words, on a $10 bill she gets $1.50 From one fast growing demographic.
This take from the rich and give to the poor mantra worked fine in the absence of King Richard in Sherwood Forest, but unless you have a better way to create large corporations without taking all their profit and distribute it amongst the poorer people without making a non working group just hanging out for their handout every month. Then lets hear it. I have listened to the politicians promising free college, pay off student debt and now the new idea of giving monies to former slaves' kin.
Wheres all this money coming from, China loans?
Wonder if Bill Gates gives a $20 for a $10 tab.
This take from the rich and give to the poor mantra worked fine in the absence of King Richard in Sherwood Forest, but unless you have a better way to create large corporations without taking all their profit and distribute it amongst the poorer people without making a non working group just hanging out for their handout every month. Then lets hear it. I have listened to the politicians promising free college, pay off student debt and now the new idea of giving monies to former slaves' kin.
Wheres all this money coming from, China loans?
Wonder if Bill Gates gives a $20 for a $10 tab.
kcollinsdesign
Old member
Laziness and God have nothing to do with this. The issue is perceptual, and largely comes from a former elite class gradually losing their position of privalge due to global political and socio-economic shifts.
If you were white and male and born before 1945, your success was virtually guaranteed by how the world economy was shaped by WWII. Females who married into this male dominated economy also enjoyed the same riches. This generation, what Dan Rather called the "Great Generation", felt entitled to this watershed because of having suffered through the Great Depression and the human cost of WWII. Beginning in the late seventies, the economic picture drastically changed, and the tax laws began to favor those that had already accumulated wealth. Increased competition for jobs had the effect of lowering relative pay, and the economic development of countries that had been battered by WWII and the emergance of China, India and other third world countries further reduced the advantages the US had after WWII. Now, a global economy and technological efficiencies continue to place downward pressure on the earnings potential of young people all over the world. Some cultures, such as the Chinese, did not enjoy the relative prosperity of the "Great Generation" US population, and as such feel no entitlement and instead feel a responsibilty for the economic success of their children. In turn, Chinese children have a great deal of gratitude for their parents and feel cuturally obligated to take care of them in their declining years. 90% of Chinese own their homes. Most experts say it is because of family support. Family and community is more important than individual wealth. Nobody expects young people to lift themselves up by their bootstraps and achieve unrealistic "Horatio Alger" success.
The word "communism" has the same root meaning as the word "community." While it is easy to blame the obscenely rich for much of our economic discontent, it is perhaps more important to recognize the decline in community and family values.
If you were white and male and born before 1945, your success was virtually guaranteed by how the world economy was shaped by WWII. Females who married into this male dominated economy also enjoyed the same riches. This generation, what Dan Rather called the "Great Generation", felt entitled to this watershed because of having suffered through the Great Depression and the human cost of WWII. Beginning in the late seventies, the economic picture drastically changed, and the tax laws began to favor those that had already accumulated wealth. Increased competition for jobs had the effect of lowering relative pay, and the economic development of countries that had been battered by WWII and the emergance of China, India and other third world countries further reduced the advantages the US had after WWII. Now, a global economy and technological efficiencies continue to place downward pressure on the earnings potential of young people all over the world. Some cultures, such as the Chinese, did not enjoy the relative prosperity of the "Great Generation" US population, and as such feel no entitlement and instead feel a responsibilty for the economic success of their children. In turn, Chinese children have a great deal of gratitude for their parents and feel cuturally obligated to take care of them in their declining years. 90% of Chinese own their homes. Most experts say it is because of family support. Family and community is more important than individual wealth. Nobody expects young people to lift themselves up by their bootstraps and achieve unrealistic "Horatio Alger" success.
The word "communism" has the same root meaning as the word "community." While it is easy to blame the obscenely rich for much of our economic discontent, it is perhaps more important to recognize the decline in community and family values.
Texas_Signmaker
Very Active Signmaker
Gino
Premium Subscriber
I beg to differ. Everything you said is based upon your opinions and eyes with blinders on. You couldn't be further from the truth, as there is no one or two reasons for any of this. Color does not play a part and basically, neither does religion, other than your last statement of family value, which is based around religion.
Y'all wanna blame the rich and take from them while rewarding the meek and unfortunate....... Sounds a little like Robin Hood, which in reality, is a form of communism. Other cultures around the world have nothing to do with how our country got to where it is, other than in the very beginning, when we needed help financially and physically (boats, cannon and mercenaries). Today, we are a force to be reckoned with and so, the whole world seems against us, for being strong, united and courageous. Have we always fought above board ?? Nope, but what country really has in the last 1,000 or so years ?? Before that, there were no rules for living, wars or taxes.
Again, for those who do not like where this country has come from, been or heading, why not just leave ?? If it bothers you so-o-o-o much, just leave. You'll never be missed. In fact, you might do the next country a bit of good with your wonderful ideas and schemes.
As for Chinese owning their own homes, ya better check on that again. They own in theory, alone. The government owns the land both rural and urban and people may maintain the buildings, which have many situations. Also, for the vast majority, they are either very cheap or super expensive and most young people can't afford it regardless.
1. Communism is not what Gino stated. Communism is the idea the government, and by extension the people, should own "everything" and because everything is communal, it can be more equitably distributed and used. Suggesting better wealth distribution is not communism. It's an American tradition. https://taxfoundation.org/us-federa...2013-nominal-and-inflation-adjusted-brackets/
2. Defenders of our current system still have not reconciled or addressed the actual point of income inequality.
Income is flat. Expenses are higher. It costs more money than ever to enter the workforce. The economy is doing relatively well. The stock market is at an all time high. Wealth in America is at an all time high. The wealth is concentrated heavily within the top 5%. Their wealth has grown at a far more rapid pace, not even remotely matching the wealth growth (or lack of) of the other 95% (which I'm going to take a stab at and say 99% of this forum belongs to).
I'm perplexed as to why people don't see the real issue with so much wealth being in so few hands. Think about the options a bit of money opens in your life. Now take that and multiply it by a billion.
2. Defenders of our current system still have not reconciled or addressed the actual point of income inequality.
Income is flat. Expenses are higher. It costs more money than ever to enter the workforce. The economy is doing relatively well. The stock market is at an all time high. Wealth in America is at an all time high. The wealth is concentrated heavily within the top 5%. Their wealth has grown at a far more rapid pace, not even remotely matching the wealth growth (or lack of) of the other 95% (which I'm going to take a stab at and say 99% of this forum belongs to).
I'm perplexed as to why people don't see the real issue with so much wealth being in so few hands. Think about the options a bit of money opens in your life. Now take that and multiply it by a billion.
They can't see it because the level and depth of the "USA #1, Inc." indoctrination process as well as our educational system that perpetuates that process is long and deep. It is far easier and less work to cling to jingoistic catchphrases, deeply entrenched urban legends and myths promulgated by those bent on maintaining the status quo than admit that other perspectives not only exist, but might have validity.
kcollinsdesign
Old member
It seems that the meaning of my earlier comment has been somewhat misconstrued by at least one of our forum participants (no doubt due to my limited skills as a writer and the hasty way in which the message was composed), to which end I feel obligated to offer clarification:
I am not blaming the rich as the cause of income equality. It is baked into our capitalist economic system. Whenever there is risk, there will be winners and losers, and the larger your "stack" the less risky it is to cover your bet. It goes without saying that the most fortunate among us will have a leg up compared to those starting with little or nothing. Thus it is, and thus it always has been.
My contention that how this is perceived informs our actions is based on observations on how other countries with capitalist economies deal with the problem of income equity. Most other developed countries have much more vigorous social support programs in place, along with a stronger reliance on community and family support. America is unique in that we still harbor the myth that anybody can raise up from the dirt and become economically successful if they work hard enough, save money, and live prudent lifestyles. This thinking was exacerbated after WWII during an unprecedented period of prosperity, during which time a person could, provided they were white and male, get a good paying job, save money, live prudently and have enough money for a comfortable retirement. Modern political and economic pardigms have changed that calculus, and in this increasingly competitive world we need to adjust our expectations and dispel the myths of "Horatio Algier" and American exceptionalism. We need to face the modern economic and social realities, becoming in turn a stronger country where we, its citizens, can live with dignity, humility, and without fear.
I am not blaming the rich as the cause of income equality. It is baked into our capitalist economic system. Whenever there is risk, there will be winners and losers, and the larger your "stack" the less risky it is to cover your bet. It goes without saying that the most fortunate among us will have a leg up compared to those starting with little or nothing. Thus it is, and thus it always has been.
My contention that how this is perceived informs our actions is based on observations on how other countries with capitalist economies deal with the problem of income equity. Most other developed countries have much more vigorous social support programs in place, along with a stronger reliance on community and family support. America is unique in that we still harbor the myth that anybody can raise up from the dirt and become economically successful if they work hard enough, save money, and live prudent lifestyles. This thinking was exacerbated after WWII during an unprecedented period of prosperity, during which time a person could, provided they were white and male, get a good paying job, save money, live prudently and have enough money for a comfortable retirement. Modern political and economic pardigms have changed that calculus, and in this increasingly competitive world we need to adjust our expectations and dispel the myths of "Horatio Algier" and American exceptionalism. We need to face the modern economic and social realities, becoming in turn a stronger country where we, its citizens, can live with dignity, humility, and without fear.
Last edited:
Gino
Premium Subscriber
Not so fast............. I'm no expert on communism or socialism, but your facts are a bit misconstrued. Communism, like socialism, are both a way to do away with social classes. Everyone works and gives to the community and the community divvies up what it deems necessary. You get what the rule makers side thinks, not the true working class. No one gets ahead for working their tail off, thus creating low esteem, low production and limited advancement, if any at all. Oh yeah.... and mass poverty. Just look around at all the communist countries around the world. They're really booming, huh ?? Socialism is not much different, other than the government now owns and operates the means for production. Again, workers will receive that they need to survive. Still no incentive to achieve more, thus little motivation.
While here, in this country, other than a few small portions of socialized programs..... in capitalism, limits do not exist and rewards for going beyond the minimum. We're allowed to keep the excess which breeds competition and makes for much advancement. It will create a divide between wealthy and the poorest, which is incentive to advance one's self.
United States do have a systems that is very equitable: Federal Government Wage System. Let's apply that to all enterprises. Problem solved.
Federal tarting pay: GS9, step 1, $41,563. President: $400,000 + perks. That is pretty equitable, CEO gets 10 times the lowest paying workers.
Federal tarting pay: GS9, step 1, $41,563. President: $400,000 + perks. That is pretty equitable, CEO gets 10 times the lowest paying workers.