http://online.wsj.com/article/SB119492157951090886.html?mod=googlenews_wsj
2007-11-13 07:47:19 · 19 answers · asked by mission_viejo_california 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Okay, I'll explain it. That study was a complete waste of money. People improve their lives over time, either by stepping up to more financially rewarding jobs or by earning raises, but that doesn't speak to the growing size of the lower or middle classes. With the shriveling value of the dollar, even middle class doesn't mean what it used to.
2007-11-13 07:52:56 · answer #1 · answered by Beardog 7 · 5⤊ 2⤋
That's an editorial, not an article.
The editorial basically says that income mobility has not changed much, but does not give you the inequalitiy index. I think it is called Gini Index.
The fact is inflation adjusted median household incomes have been stagnant or going down under Bush. The poverty rate has also been going up, and yet I've read articles that say the number of millionaires keeps going up at a fast rate.
That sounds like the rich are getting richer, and the poor poorer.
"The study is also valuable because it shows that income mobility remains little changed from what similar studies found in the 1970s and 1980s. Some journalists and academics have cited selective evidence to claim that income mobility has declined in recent years."
2007-11-13 15:56:17 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 2⤋
It explains itself.
It is what it is and what the Democrats say it is is not.
Hillary lies about it because she is a pathological liar and can not help herself. If she started telling the truth now, even if it were positive, her posse would end up in therapy, they just couldn't deal with it.
Kucinich is crazy. He's just krazy.
Biden is the most honest. He just doesn't mention it.
Obama is a dopey kid and just doesn't know any better.
Richardson will do whatever Hillary says because he wants a cabinet job. He doesn't want to be the Governor of the desert anymore.
Gravel is dead. Somebody needs to just push him over so we can tell.
Edwards and Dodd are the one's who have me confused. They are in the business. They know exactly what's going on and just deny it. This is an example of hating Bush so much they have lost all reason.
2007-11-13 16:01:08 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
I'll tell you how I see it from personal experience. It seems to me that the more money I make, them more they take. Health care costs are high for me too and I work at a fortune 500 company as a software engineer.
Frankly, I am tired. I work very hard to get here, and I am not wealthy by any means. To have wealth, means to actually have amassed it. I am working on that, but everytime I turn around the government, either local, state, or fed, is in my pocket or my portfolio. It's madness.
2007-11-13 15:58:56 · answer #4 · answered by MrOrph 6 · 3⤊ 1⤋
The article is interesting but misleading. While the poor have seen increases in income, they have still seen a decline in actual income since purchasing power has not kept up with rising costs. When you look at the price of fuel, homes, food, etc, from 25 years ago to today, then look at income increases, you see the numbers are misleading. But lets be honest, the nice thing about numbers is you can use them to prove anything you would like.
2007-11-13 15:54:29 · answer #5 · answered by psycmikev 6 · 8⤊ 2⤋
Yes, Like I'm going to accept anything that comes from Bush's treasury department as credible!
You've gotta be joking!
How many departments have been busted out under Bush appointees as feeding false information to the press?
5 maybe 6 so far? hoo huumm guess the treasury department can be #7.
Funny how bush doesn't want to spend a penny more on our children, but will waste money on opinion studies in an attempt to debunk what most Americans are coming to witness as reality.
2007-11-13 15:52:08 · answer #6 · answered by avail_skillz 7 · 6⤊ 2⤋
The poor got richer? Bull s*it! The Wall Street Journal is a pack of lies when it comes to working people. Ask anyone who drives several miles to work and pays for health care if a rising tide is lifting all boats.
2007-11-13 15:52:57 · answer #7 · answered by Zardoz 7 · 7⤊ 2⤋
The rich have good habits and know how to handle and invest money and the poor have bad habits with money and buy lots of trinkets and do not know how to handle money.
I was shocked when I first heard this, and most people that get offended when they hear that have bad habits with money and don't want to admit it.
Read Robert Kiyosaki's book Rich Dad, Poor Dad
http://planbcoach.googlepages.com/jw
2007-11-13 15:57:59 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
The rich are rich because they understand and apply rules concerning money. Poor people are poor because they don't understand , or don't apply the principles.
If you need to learn some basics, I'd suggest a book called "The Richest Man in Babylon". It can probably get you started anyway.
2007-11-13 15:57:01 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 3⤋
LMAO... you don'tknow any poor people I take it or you have no concept of what poverty is. Here's a correction to your question... The rsuper-rich get richer, the middle class gets poorer and the poor struggle to maintain poverty.
LMAO
2007-11-13 15:56:05 · answer #10 · answered by huckleberryjoe 3 · 5⤊ 2⤋