Wealth inequality in the USA.

A forum not related to waterfowl for discussing the more controversial and hot topic issues in our world from immigration, politics, the war, etc..

Moderators: Smackaduck, MM

Re: Wealth inequality in the USA.

Postby CJ » Mon Oct 28, 2013 11:54 am

As a member of the U.S. Senate Budget Committee, I am more than aware that a $17 trillion dollar national debt and a $700 billion deficit are serious problems that must be addressed.

But I am also aware that real unemployment is close to 14 percent, that tens of millions of Americans are working for horrendously low wages, that more Americans are now living in poverty than ever before and that wealth and income inequality in the United States is now greater than in any other major country -- with the gap between the very rich and everyone else growing wider and wider.

Further, when we talk about the national budget, it is vitally important that we remember how we got into this fiscal crisis in the first place and who was responsible for it. Let us never forget that when Bill Clinton left office in January of 2001, the U.S. had a budget surplus of $236 billion with projected budget surpluses as far as the eye could see. During that time, the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office projected a 10-year budget surplus of $5.6 trillion, enough to erase the entire national debt by the end of 2011.

What happened? How did we, in a few short years, go from a large budget surplus into horrendous debt? The answer is not that complicated. Under President Bush we went to wars in Afghanistan and Iraq -- and didn't pay for them. We just put them on the credit card. The cost of those wars is estimated to be between $4 trillion to $6 trillion. Further, Bush and Congress passed an expensive prescription drug program that was unpaid for. They also reduced revenue by giving huge tax breaks to the wealthy and large corporations. On top of all that, the Wall Street collapse and ensuing recession significantly reduced tax receipts and increased spending for unemployment compensation and food stamps, further exacerbating the deficit situation.

Interestingly, the so-called congressional "deficit hawks" -- Congressman Paul Ryan, Senator Jeff Sessions and other conservative Republicans -- all voted for those measures that increased the deficit. These are the same folks who now want to dismantle virtually every social program designed to protect working families, the elderly, the children, the sick and the poor. In other words, it's okay to spend trillions on a war we should never have waged and large defense budgets, and provide huge tax breaks for billionaires and multi-national corporations. It's just not okay when, in very difficult economic times, we try to protect the most vulnerable people in our country.

Where do we go from here? How do we now draft a federal budget which creates jobs, makes our country more productive, protects working families and lowers the deficit?

For a start, we have to understand that, from both a moral and economic perspective, we cannot impose more austerity on the people of our country who are already suffering. The time is now for the wealthy and multi-national corporations who are doing phenomenally well to help us rebuild America and lower our deficit.

At a time when the richest 1 percent own 38 percent of the financial wealth of America, while the bottom 60 percent own a mere 2.3 percent -- we cannot balance the budget on the backs of people who have virtually nothing. When 95 percent of all new income during 2009 through 2012 went to the top 1 percent, while tens of millions of working Americans saw a decline in their income, we cannot cut programs that these workers depend upon.

Instead of talking about cuts in Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, we must end the absurdity of one out of four corporations in America not paying a nickel in federal income taxes. At a time when multi-national corporations and the wealthy are avoiding more than $100 billion a year in taxes by stashing money in tax havens like the Cayman Islands and Bermuda, we need to make them pay taxes just like middle-class Americans. The truth of the matter is that according to the most recent information available profitable corporations are only paying 13 percent of their income in federal taxes which is near a 40-year low.

While in January 2013, we successfully ended Bush's tax breaks for the richest 1 percent, the truth is that they continue to exist for the top 2 percent, those households earning between $250,000 and $450,000 a year. That must end.

At a time when we now spend almost as much as the rest of the world combined on defense, we can afford to make judicious cuts in our military without compromising our military capabilities.

Frankly, it is time that Congress started listening to the ordinary people. Recently, the Republican Party learned a hard lesson when the American people stated loudly and clearly that it was wrong to shut down the government and not pay our bills because some extreme right-wing members of Congress do not like the Affordable Care Act. Well, there's another lesson that my Republican colleagues are going to have to absorb. Poll after poll make it very clear that the American people overwhelmingly do not want to cut Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. In fact, according to a recent National Journal poll, 81 percent of the American people do not want to cut Medicare at all; 76 percent of the American people do not want to cut Social Security at all; and 60 percent of the American people do not want to cut Medicaid at all. Meanwhile, other polls have made it very clear that at a time of growing income and wealth inequality, Americans believe that the wealthiest among us and large corporations must pay their fair share in taxes.

It is time to develop a federal budget which is moral and which makes good economic sense. It is time to develop a budget which invests in our future by creating jobs rebuilding our crumbling infrastructure improvement and expanding educational opportunities. It is time for those who have so much to help us with deficit reduction. It is time that we listen to what the American people want, and not just respond to the billionaire class and major campaign contributors.


Is he right?
May the wind be always at your back
CJ
hunter
 
Posts: 119
Joined: Wed Dec 06, 2006 9:15 pm
Location: Prunetucky


Re: Wealth inequality in the USA.

Postby SpinnerMan » Mon Oct 28, 2013 12:12 pm

CJ wrote:What happened? How did we, in a few short years, go from a large budget surplus into horrendous debt?
9/11/01 on the heals of the crash of the internet economic bubble and the horrendous book cooking that occured during the Clinton years and were exposed after he was out of office.

And then the coup de grace was the election of a Democrat-controlled Congress.

This was the last budget before the Democrats took over Congress.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_United_States_federal_budget

Total revenue $2.57 trillion
Total expenditures $2.73 trillion
Deficit $161 billion

Then in FY 2008, the budget enacted by the Congress that took over in 2007 after winning in 2006.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_United_States_federal_budget
Total revenue $2.7 trillion (estimated)
Total expenditures $2.9 trillion (estimated)
Deficit $239 billion (estimated)
$454.8 billion (actual)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_United_States_federal_budget

Total revenue $2.7 trillion (estimated)
$2.105 trillion (actual)[1]
Total expenditures $3.107 trillion (estimated)
$3.518 trillion (actual)[1]
Deficit $407 billion (estimated)
$1.413 trillion (actual)[1]

Spending went up and up, by nearly a trillion dollars once the Democrats took over and Bush didn't stop it.

We went to war a long time before the deficit took off. You need to get your facts straight. It's easy to do since Al Gore took the initiative. Many years after the start of the Iraq and Afghan wars, the deficits were still small. It was the insane spending increases once the Democrats took over that are the reason. When revenues decline, you can't increase spending dramatically and then claim that the deficit is not your fault. It was the path you chose. Stand behind your dumbass decision that you made. If you are too stupid to realizing increasing spending when revenue is falling doesn't lead to debt, remind me why they are in Congress?

CJ wrote:How do we now draft a federal budget which creates jobs, makes our country more productive, protects working families and lowers the deficit?
Cut spending. Where does the government get the money? They take it. That causes harm. Even if they take it from the "right" people, those people pass the burden on to the people you are trying to help. Remove the minimum wage that drives unemployment among the youngest and lowest skilled Americans through the roof. It's hard to get to the 2nd and higher rungs, if you can't put your time in on the bottom rung because the government has priced your services out of the market.

The answer is to do just about the exact opposite of every proven failed policy that you advocate. They have never worked and they never will. They are fatally flawed and no matter how good they make you feel about yourself, they will do vastly more harm to more people than they will ever help.
A politician thinks of the next election; a statesman of the next generation. A politician looks for the success of his party; a statesman for that of the country. The statesman wished to steer, while the politician was satisfied to drift.
User avatar
SpinnerMan
hunter
 
Posts: 15803
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 11:24 am
Location: Joliet, IL

Re: Wealth inequality in the USA.

Postby vincentpa » Mon Oct 28, 2013 1:47 pm

A young man in his early twenties dressed well in urban chic wearing brand new nike airs and checking a smart phone just asked me for a dollar. I want to kill him.


Sent from my iPhone 5, which sucks my cojones. Don't buy one.
In a free society, it is not the obligation of the citizen to prove to the government that he is a good person. It is the obligation of the government to prove to the rest of the citizenry that the citizen is a bad person, with probable cause.
User avatar
vincentpa
hunter
 
Posts: 7715
Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2010 6:50 am
Location: Pittsburgh, PA

Re: Wealth inequality in the USA.

Postby SpinnerMan » Mon Oct 28, 2013 1:55 pm

vincentpa wrote:A young man in his early twenties dressed well in urban chic wearing brand new nike airs and checking a smart phone just asked me for a dollar. I want to kill him.
Now I just got back from my mandatory workplace violence training and I believe I must report you for this statement.

Only in government can they be so worried about the risk of workplace violence that they will require mandatory training and have an UNARMED so-called security. :fingerhead:
A politician thinks of the next election; a statesman of the next generation. A politician looks for the success of his party; a statesman for that of the country. The statesman wished to steer, while the politician was satisfied to drift.
User avatar
SpinnerMan
hunter
 
Posts: 15803
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 11:24 am
Location: Joliet, IL

Re: Wealth inequality in the USA.

Postby blackduckdog2 » Mon Oct 28, 2013 1:57 pm

vincentpa wrote:A young man in his early twenties dressed well in urban chic wearing brand new nike airs and checking a smart phone just asked me for a dollar. I want to kill him.


Sent from my iPhone 5, which sucks my cojones. Don't buy one.

You can kill him. What's the problem?
"We have met the enemy, and he is us."
Walt Kelly, via Slow's avatar. Look it up
User avatar
blackduckdog2
hunter
 
Posts: 6286
Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2008 11:02 am

Re: Wealth inequality in the USA.

Postby vincentpa » Mon Oct 28, 2013 2:12 pm

blackduckdog2 wrote:
vincentpa wrote:A young man in his early twenties dressed well in urban chic wearing brand new nike airs and checking a smart phone just asked me for a dollar. I want to kill him.


Sent from my iPhone 5, which sucks my cojones. Don't buy one.

You can kill him. What's the problem?


Jail.


Sent from my iPhone 5, which sucks my cojones. Don't buy one.
In a free society, it is not the obligation of the citizen to prove to the government that he is a good person. It is the obligation of the government to prove to the rest of the citizenry that the citizen is a bad person, with probable cause.
User avatar
vincentpa
hunter
 
Posts: 7715
Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2010 6:50 am
Location: Pittsburgh, PA

Re: Wealth inequality in the USA.

Postby blackduckdog2 » Mon Oct 28, 2013 3:28 pm

vincentpa wrote:
blackduckdog2 wrote:
vincentpa wrote:A young man in his early twenties dressed well in urban chic wearing brand new nike airs and checking a smart phone just asked me for a dollar. I want to kill him.


Sent from my iPhone 5, which sucks my cojones. Don't buy one.

You can kill him. What's the problem?


Jail.


Sent from my iPhone 5, which sucks my cojones. Don't buy one.

You got the go-ahead from a CI Forum liberal. That's a license to kill in any jurisdiction
"We have met the enemy, and he is us."
Walt Kelly, via Slow's avatar. Look it up
User avatar
blackduckdog2
hunter
 
Posts: 6286
Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2008 11:02 am

Re: Wealth inequality in the USA.

Postby assateague » Mon Oct 28, 2013 5:38 pm

vincentpa wrote:
blackduckdog2 wrote:
vincentpa wrote:A young man in his early twenties dressed well in urban chic wearing brand new nike airs and checking a smart phone just asked me for a dollar. I want to kill him.


Sent from my iPhone 5, which sucks my cojones. Don't buy one.

You can kill him. What's the problem?


Jail.


Sent from my iPhone 5, which sucks my cojones. Don't buy one.



Your healthcare will be better than what any of will get, at least.
WOLVERINES

Give a man a fish and he eats for a day. Let a man vote to give himself a fish and he eats until society collapses.
User avatar
assateague
Emu hunter extraordinaire
 
Posts: 21277
Joined: Tue Oct 06, 2009 12:25 pm
Location: Eastern Shore, People's Republic of Maryland

Re: Wealth inequality in the USA.

Postby ohioboy » Mon Oct 28, 2013 5:55 pm

BREAKING NEWS!!!!!!!

(for real, this actually broke on all the local nightly news programs and they went to live shots of basically nothing at all outside of the court house. back to the breaking news...)

BREAKING NEWS!!!!

Chris Brown's charges are reduced to misdemeanors. I know you can all sleep a little easier tonight.




I really am starting to hate people.
User avatar
ohioboy
hunter
 
Posts: 2293
Joined: Mon Apr 06, 2009 9:28 pm
Location: MoCo, MD

Re: Wealth inequality in the USA.

Postby Indaswamp » Mon Oct 28, 2013 5:58 pm

CJ wrote:As a member of the U.S. Senate Budget Committee, I am more than aware that a $17 trillion dollar national debt and a $700 billion deficit are serious problems that must be addressed.

But I am also aware that real unemployment is close to 14 percent, that tens of millions of Americans are working for horrendously low wages, that more Americans are now living in poverty than ever before and that wealth and income inequality in the United States is now greater than in any other major country -- with the gap between the very rich and everyone else growing wider and wider.

Further, when we talk about the national budget, it is vitally important that we remember how we got into this fiscal crisis in the first place and who was responsible for it. Let us never forget that when Bill Clinton left office in January of 2001, the U.S. had a budget surplus of $236 billion with projected budget surpluses as far as the eye could see. During that time, the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office projected a 10-year budget surplus of $5.6 trillion, enough to erase the entire national debt by the end of 2011.

What happened? How did we, in a few short years, go from a large budget surplus into horrendous debt? The answer is not that complicated. Under President Bush we went to wars in Afghanistan and Iraq -- and didn't pay for them. We just put them on the credit card. The cost of those wars is estimated to be between $4 trillion to $6 trillion. Further, Bush and Congress passed an expensive prescription drug program that was unpaid for. They also reduced revenue by giving huge tax breaks to the wealthy and large corporations. On top of all that, the Wall Street collapse and ensuing recession significantly reduced tax receipts and increased spending for unemployment compensation and food stamps, further exacerbating the deficit situation.

Interestingly, the so-called congressional "deficit hawks" -- Congressman Paul Ryan, Senator Jeff Sessions and other conservative Republicans -- all voted for those measures that increased the deficit. These are the same folks who now want to dismantle virtually every social program designed to protect working families, the elderly, the children, the sick and the poor. In other words, it's okay to spend trillions on a war we should never have waged and large defense budgets, and provide huge tax breaks for billionaires and multi-national corporations. It's just not okay when, in very difficult economic times, we try to protect the most vulnerable people in our country.

Where do we go from here? How do we now draft a federal budget which creates jobs, makes our country more productive, protects working families and lowers the deficit?

For a start, we have to understand that, from both a moral and economic perspective, we cannot impose more austerity on the people of our country who are already suffering. The time is now for the wealthy and multi-national corporations who are doing phenomenally well to help us rebuild America and lower our deficit.

At a time when the richest 1 percent own 38 percent of the financial wealth of America, while the bottom 60 percent own a mere 2.3 percent -- we cannot balance the budget on the backs of people who have virtually nothing. When 95 percent of all new income during 2009 through 2012 went to the top 1 percent, while tens of millions of working Americans saw a decline in their income, we cannot cut programs that these workers depend upon.

Instead of talking about cuts in Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, we must end the absurdity of one out of four corporations in America not paying a nickel in federal income taxes. At a time when multi-national corporations and the wealthy are avoiding more than $100 billion a year in taxes by stashing money in tax havens like the Cayman Islands and Bermuda, we need to make them pay taxes just like middle-class Americans. The truth of the matter is that according to the most recent information available profitable corporations are only paying 13 percent of their income in federal taxes which is near a 40-year low.

While in January 2013, we successfully ended Bush's tax breaks for the richest 1 percent, the truth is that they continue to exist for the top 2 percent, those households earning between $250,000 and $450,000 a year. That must end.

At a time when we now spend almost as much as the rest of the world combined on defense, we can afford to make judicious cuts in our military without compromising our military capabilities.

Frankly, it is time that Congress started listening to the ordinary people. Recently, the Republican Party learned a hard lesson when the American people stated loudly and clearly that it was wrong to shut down the government and not pay our bills because some extreme right-wing members of Congress do not like the Affordable Care Act. Well, there's another lesson that my Republican colleagues are going to have to absorb. Poll after poll make it very clear that the American people overwhelmingly do not want to cut Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. In fact, according to a recent National Journal poll, 81 percent of the American people do not want to cut Medicare at all; 76 percent of the American people do not want to cut Social Security at all; and 60 percent of the American people do not want to cut Medicaid at all. Meanwhile, other polls have made it very clear that at a time of growing income and wealth inequality, Americans believe that the wealthiest among us and large corporations must pay their fair share in taxes.

It is time to develop a federal budget which is moral and which makes good economic sense. It is time to develop a budget which invests in our future by creating jobs rebuilding our crumbling infrastructure improvement and expanding educational opportunities. It is time for those who have so much to help us with deficit reduction. It is time that we listen to what the American people want, and not just respond to the billionaire class and major campaign contributors.


Is he right?

Is this coming from you, or did you quote someone?
The Cajun 7 Course Meal; 1 lb. of boudin and a six pack of Abita beer.

Save the Marsh, Eat a Nutria!

Image
User avatar
Indaswamp
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 56117
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2008 8:40 pm
Location: South Louisiana

Re: Wealth inequality in the USA.

Postby CJ » Tue Oct 29, 2013 10:32 am

Sorry, I didn't make it clear, this came from Bernie Sanders. I'm a happy troll 99% of the time, I visit the site once in a while but decide to move on, nothing to see here. On the whole how many people have changed there minds about sides they generally align with? Happy chatting
May the wind be always at your back
CJ
hunter
 
Posts: 119
Joined: Wed Dec 06, 2006 9:15 pm
Location: Prunetucky

Re: Wealth inequality in the USA.

Postby assateague » Tue Oct 29, 2013 10:47 am

At least as far as I'm concerned (not speaking for anyone else), I argue to test/firm up my own positions. Having a belief is one thing. But being able to defend that belief is really the only way to "test" it, in my opinion. I'm not trying to change minds, anyway. When I was an interrogator, you learn quickly that you can't "break" somebody, but EVERYBODY breaks. The difference is that they do it from within their own minds, if you push the right buttons at the right time under the right conditions. ("Buttons" being a metaphor, not actual electrode buttons, or something :lol3: ) Same thing with arguing- your words will never change someone's mind, only their own mind can do that. But if you happen to feed it the right words at the right time under the right conditions, it will easily change itself. In the case of interrogations, based off of your words and arguments, their own mind "convinces" them that they want to talk.Same with arguing, if that makes sense.
WOLVERINES

Give a man a fish and he eats for a day. Let a man vote to give himself a fish and he eats until society collapses.
User avatar
assateague
Emu hunter extraordinaire
 
Posts: 21277
Joined: Tue Oct 06, 2009 12:25 pm
Location: Eastern Shore, People's Republic of Maryland

Re: Wealth inequality in the USA.

Postby ScaupHunter » Tue Oct 29, 2013 12:37 pm

Interrogators hold all the cards once they have you. So many weak points to prey on. human emotions, our need for human contact, the need to communicate, human inability to cope with stress, etc....... These things are only part of why solitary confinement works so well as a punishment. Very few humans can stand being deprived of human contact and outside stimulus.
Last edited by ScaupHunter on Tue Oct 29, 2013 4:17 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Bella's
Decoy Setting Pro Staff
Boat Operator Pro Staff
Duck Shooting Pro Staff
Warm Towel Pro Staff
Snack Supply Pro Staff

He works for free! Who's the B now?
User avatar
ScaupHunter
hunter
 
Posts: 6397
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2012 5:57 am

Re: Wealth inequality in the USA.

Postby blackduckdog2 » Tue Oct 29, 2013 4:02 pm

assateague wrote:At least as far as I'm concerned (not speaking for anyone else), I argue to test/firm up my own positions. Having a belief is one thing. But being able to defend that belief is really the only way to "test" it, in my opinion. I'm not trying to change minds, anyway. When I was an interrogator, you learn quickly that you can't "break" somebody, but EVERYBODY breaks. The difference is that they do it from within their own minds, if you push the right buttons at the right time under the right conditions. ("Buttons" being a metaphor, not actual electrode buttons, or something :lol3: ) Same thing with arguing- your words will never change someone's mind, only their own mind can do that. But if you happen to feed it the right words at the right time under the right conditions, it will easily change itself. In the case of interrogations, based off of your words and arguments, their own mind "convinces" them that they want to talk.Same with arguing, if that makes sense.

It totally makes sense. In fact, it's the only thing that makes sense about arguing
"We have met the enemy, and he is us."
Walt Kelly, via Slow's avatar. Look it up
User avatar
blackduckdog2
hunter
 
Posts: 6286
Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2008 11:02 am

Re: Wealth inequality in the USA.

Postby Drakenstien » Fri Nov 08, 2013 8:40 pm

The explanation of it all

On the lower end you have a lot of people living off the government or retired. Some of those are just plain not working because the government pays more than minimum wage if you know the tricks. For example to show you the dependence of the government, if a family of four receives $636 in snap benefits and 36 of it is cut, like just recently, everyone freaks out like the joker says on batman. That's why the lows are so low. And it is going to get harder and harder to gain income because of taxation and regulations of those with a lot of income. These two things scare investors or "employers"( they have the money to build things) of the people on the bottom end because there is less profit and a lot of risk. So Unlike many I understand why the rich are staying at home and playing the stock market. The way to prove this is looking at companies profit margins and the their stocks( Apple for one has a good profit margin and still has bad stock). So the rich people are investing in rich people instead of investing in the corner stores, "new" manufacturing, and new technology(or just investing in companies that already have technology or manufacturing things instead of investing with new people and new ideas) . Because why risk their money in a 5-10 precent profit margin over a long period( a year or more) when they can make that at-least an average of 2 percent a month on the stocks and pull their money out any trading day of the month. If that explains the chart.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Drakenstien
hunter
 
Posts: 125
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 9:10 pm

Re: Wealth inequality in the USA.

Postby Drakenstien » Fri Nov 08, 2013 8:41 pm

It's a lot but I don't know how else to explain it


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Drakenstien
hunter
 
Posts: 125
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 9:10 pm

Previous

Return to Controversial Issues Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests