Why is this a "problem" in the first place?

Question

I have 100. You have 5. 3 is what you need to live fairly comfortably - cable, internet, decent house, decent car, one big and one small vacation per year, health club membership, couple of nights out a month, and your bar tab of course.

I'm No. 10. Out of thousands. You're at the 70th percentile.

Ten years from now, I have 160. I've slipped down to number 40 because so many people have even more. You're at the 55th percentile and you have 8 or 9, and 4 is now what it takes to live comfortably. The "top 1%" have a greater percentage of the total wealth but the total wealth has increased and it's not the same 1%.

Your ability to jump from 70th to 55th (Ginni coefficient) is the same as it used to be and it's the same as it is in Scandinavia, but the gap between 55th and 70th is greater than it used to be and much greater than it is in Scandanavia (you have the same chances of increasing your income by $15K as a Scandanavian has of increasing his income by $5K.

Sorry Longhair but this is not something I'm giving you a pass on. This is my issue - reading up on this issue and learning that the raw data refute Krugman and Dobbs' entire thesis were the catalysts of my interest in politics - - - and the reason I'm so good at this is that it didn't work the other way around. I'm not a "con" who looked for articles to support my theses - - - I'm an ex-Lib who read the raw data and read what non-partisan economists had to say about it and said hold on, the class warfare argument is completely FOS.

Answer 1

If you want to be part of the "1%", then work harder - strive to achieve more. If not then why are you complaining?

Answer 2

Mine is a real position - the shore of Crummock Water interior the Lake District (uk). you may walk by the fields, faraway from the village - no longer a lot of human beings look to study about it so that's a very quiet spot. The lake is in a valley, really sheltered and non violent, and the mountains upward push up on both aspect and in the back of you there are purely timber and in the front there is purely water. there is not any wind and no noise, and that i opt for to sit on the rocks that jut out over the lake and only watch the water. At nightfall the sunlight instruments between the mountains, and at nighttime there are extra stars than i have ever considered everywhere else.

Answer 3

Paper numbers never show the true picture. Reality is often far more harsh than the numbers people crunch.

I keep seeing people (mainly conservatives) state how great this economy is and how low the unemployment rate is. Numbers do paint a rosier picture than the reality of day to day living for the common working class family.

Few can afford to purchase a home these days. My heating bill is $273 dollars although I live alone and turn it down when not at home. They had to invent interest only loans and 50 year mortgages to make home ownership viable for many.

Violent crime is one the rise as more average people lose hope of ever getting ahead. The illiteracy rate is climbing. Mainly those who were in a position to take advantage of a bad situation are getting ahead these days such as myself.

If you were heavily vested in the market as I am, the Iraq war has paid off in dividends. Only at the cost of thousands of lives. As with the 80s, the haves have more and the struggling are struggling more. All of the number crunching in the world will not replace the millions of high paying jobs that have gone away over the past six years. Working at Walmart doesn't cut it as a viable alternative. It does help the unemployment rate seem rosy.

Answer 4

In a country where 4 is required, and some people have 160, there is no excuse for the government to allow anyone to have 0. "I'm proud to pay taxes," wrote Oliver Wendell Holmes, a Republican appointee to the Supreme Court. "It's the price we pay for living in a free society." Did that grab you? How about this: "If a free society will not help the many who are poor, it cannot save the few who are rich." -- JFK. We're not saying, "Give all 160 to the people who have 0." Jesus would have said that, but American liberals are not. We're saying, "Nobody should have less than 4, and you'll be doing just fine with 100. Don't be so greedy.

Answer 5

First of all, there is no such thing as a non-partisan economist. Secondly, the decline of middle class manufacturing jobs is a well-known fact. So is the re-writing of industry regulation to benefit large shareholders and large corporations.

The problem is the corruption of democracy by the plutocratic 1%. You can play all the games with Ginni coefficients and supposed upward mobility you like.

The fact is the rich run the government to enrich themselves, they are destroying the middle class job base in this country, and fools like you are supporting them.

Answer 6

I have never understood why people are so outraged that some make much more money than others. If the top 1% is unimaginably wealthy, then good for them: should one want to be one of them, develop a patentable idea...

Don't tax someone simply for being successful.

Answer 7

Yes we all want financial security, but guess what? Money isn't everything. And you can still be extremely unhappy even if you have a lot of money.

Somehow money is the root of unhappiness. People who know about it are unhappy, because they want more of it. And people who have it are unhappy, because they really don't know how to deal with all the financial wealth that they have.

Answer 8

It's not REALLY a problem, it's the excuse. The problem is too many people want to be spectators to the rat race. They want the privileges of the winners without having to actually run it.

But, you're right. In your scenerio, we all win.

Answer 9

And all this makes a Huge difference because????????

In other words WGAS!

Answer 10

Yeah whatever you say there skippy. "Honey,can you bring me another beer?"