Is there a political argument MORE demonstrably wrong than "only the rich are benefiting?"?

Question

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1229294/posts
http://www.nytimes.com/specials/downsize/21cox.html
http://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/1988/05/art1full.pdf
http://www.frbsf.org/econrsrch/wklyltr/el97-07.html#winners
http://www.dallasfed.org/fed/annual/1999p/ar95.html
http://money.cnn.com/2005/05/25/pf/record_millionaires/index.htm?cnn=yes
http://money.cnn.com/2005/09/28/news/economy/millionaire_survey/index.htm?cnn=yes
http://money.cnn.com/2006/03/28/news/economy/millionaires/?cnn=yes
http://www.heritage.org/Research/Labor/bg1773.cfm

The Fed and the Census Bureau are "right wing frauds that have been discredited..." ROLMFAO!!!!

If you make 6 bucks an hour, odds are 70/30 that in a year you'll make 8.50.

Try reading some of these - most of the people making 6 bucks an hour when
Bush took office have since graduated and now have real jobs.

Sorry but you can repeat "trickle down economics didn't work" all you want, the numbers say otherwise. It's like saying "it's not raining in Boston now" - it IS. Incomes are up at all levels, there are more people who, however you define "rich," are so, and economic mobility, in absolute terms, has increased (absolute meaning you see a guy drive down the street in a better car, your chances of someday being able to afford that car are better, even if your chances of catching up to that guy, whose income will also rise, have stayed the same).

The number of poor people is up but we've imported 12 million poor people in the last 10 years, illegally alone. That's an immigration problem, not an economic problem, unless you blame Bush for the economy in Mexico.

The number of "extremely poor people" is up in the last two years because of Katrina. That's a natural disaster - unless you blame Bush for those, which some people have actually done.

And no, I HAVEN'T spoken to any Mr. or Mrs. Average lately.

But the Census Bureau HAS!!!! And unless tens of millions of Mr. and Mrs. Averages have lied, then what I'm saying is true.

Seriously, listen to what you people are saying - "conservative right wing ideologues" - - you think that describes the FED???? The Census Bureau??? The Department of Labor???? Are you serious???

Sorry folks, the facts aren't biased.

They're just the facts.

And Anthony, TAX REVENUE IS UP SINCE THE TAX CUTS.

Answer 1

Well if your argument is intended to divide the individuals and place them into classes then the argument has worked well over the decades. It is the key argument in a socialist/communist movement.

It is like a key identification phrase, when you hear class envy you are either talking to a commie, or you are talking to a brainwashed idiot follower of communism. The difference is the commie knows it is a lie so that he can maintain his wealth and position in the Vanguard of the Elite, while the idiot does his bidding.

BTW, your sources are impecable. The link below will take you to the dems game plan which they have followed faithfully for over 60 years, after all stealing a country does not happen overnight.

Answer 2

The Free Republic article is written in a right wing rag called the National Review, it's linked the the Heritage Foundation and it's research is questionable since the results and the research methods are known to be skewed to get a particular result to support their right wing ideology rather than to actually study the matter at hand.
The rest of the articles do not sustain YOUR argument. They mearly demonstrate the known fact that people with money, wealth and assets already are gaining at a faster rate. This has been the argument from the national studies already. What you fail to realize is that those with assets, money, capital etc are increasing those assets at a fast rate while the middle class is slipping. And, the poor are slipping more. Your articles only prove this fact. Supply side economics or trickle down economics are proven not to work.
Tax revenues are not up that much and we still have a huge trade and budget deficit rolling over from last year.

THE FED IS NOT THE HERITAGE FOUNDATION. YOU DIDN'T QUOTE THE FED of the present, you led us to articles from 1997 about the 1980's. Even Alan Greenberg said the U.S needs to deal with the growing gap between the rich and poor. You're right, facts aren't biased, but the Heritage Foundation and the National Review are very biased. See some of the sources below about Greenspan.

http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/02/18/news/letter.php
http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/0614/p01s03-usec.html
http://washingtontimes.com/specialreport/20050730-114005-1449r.htm
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11060191/
http://academic.udayton.edu/race/06hrights/georegions/northamerica/china03.htm
http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/05133/504149.stm
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0817-02.htm

Answer 3

Well, then there is the recent study saying that our number of people in extreme poverty has doubled, and there's that Fed statement that wages are currently the smallest portion of gross domestic product since world war II.

And any parent can point to programs cut in schools to fund more ESL target programs. Take our children's education and you take their futures.

There are prices and prices, and THAT one is too high.

Answer 4

If your poor, and making 6 bucks an hour, then Bush's tax cut didn't help you at all.

Those tax cuts were for the rich. They benefitted the rich, creating a 250 billion a year deficit, that will burden future generations of Americans.

Trickledown economics is a joke.

Answer 5

Wow, a bunch of articles about the economy of the 1980s writen by a bunch of rightwing frauds who have been discredited.

Very impressive!

Answer 6

Since you are obviously rich or have been brainwashed by the conservative right-wing ideologues, I will answer your inquiry with another rhetorical question. Are you one of the rich who is attempting to protect your fortune from the unwashed masses?

Answer 7

here's one that was asked 20 minutes ago.


Is there any doubt that lieberals are the "enemy from within" and fully intent on destroying our America?

Answer 8

Yes, but it's closely related: Higher taxes equals higher federal revenue.

http://www.ncpa.org/studies/s159/s159.html

Answer 9

You obviously haven't spoken to any Mr. or Mrs. Average Person lately, have you?

Answer 10

The only thing more wrong is...

"Global warming is a real threat."

30 years ago it was global cooling and there is NO SCIENTIFIC PROOF global warming is man made.