Inequality Video
-
So no thoughts in growing levels of income inequality? Wealth disparities? Shrinking middle class? Not a concern at all?
So no thoughts in growing levels of income inequality? Wealth disparities? Shrinking middle class? Not a concern at all?
Not sure what would change this short of a Bastille reunion.
-
Come on bud, give me a number.
How much makes it okay?
How much makes everybody happy?
You tell me.
WSS
-
That's not the conversation I want to have. That's not the conversation anyone over the age of 16 wants to have. It's not where the debate is. It's cartoonish and sophomoric.
I should stop trying to get blood from a stone.
-
So no thoughts in growing levels of income inequality? Wealth disparities? Shrinking middle class? Not a concern at all?
Not sure what would change this short of a Bastille reunion.
Not sure what would change this short of a Bastille reunion.
When people talk about the need for the Republican Party to have more ideas that "government bad" and "cut taxes" this is what they're talking about.
-
That's not the conversation I want to have. That's not the conversation anyone over the age of 16 wants to have. It's not where the debate is. It's cartoonish and sophomoric.
I should stop trying to get blood from a stone.
That's not the conversation I want to have. That's not the conversation anyone over the age of 16 wants to have. It's not where the debate is. It's cartoonish and sophomoric.
I should stop trying to get blood from a stone.
Actually you could try not being sophomoric and cartoonish. (Maybe not...)
And you could try out an idea other than government is God and the answer to every question is more tax money.
WSS
-
Oh, that was nice. Another "I know you are, but what am I?"
I really think you want to have these conversations with someone else. The person you describe is so far away from me that it just makes me laugh. You're not even talking to me, or about what I'm talking about. You can't get away from the cartoon of a bitter liberal who wants to take your money and give it to poor people, full stop. I don't say a word. I just raise a topic that has a 100 different ways to go, and you keep ...bringing ...it ...back. It's your sweet spot. It's all you can do.
Seriously, go back and read this thread from the beginning. It's me shaking my head while you go off on your own personal bogeyman.
I think he looks somewhat like this. And he died in 1983.
-
Not sure what would change this short of a Bastille reunion.
When people talk about the need for the Republican Party to have more ideas that "government bad" and "cut taxes" this is what they're talking about.
When people talk about the need for the Republican Party to have more ideas that "government bad" and "cut taxes" this is what they're talking about.
And this is exclusive to the Republican Party?
-
What?
The personal boogie man here is your vision of the evil Republican Party.
Frankly I'm not sure what it is you want to say here.
You seem upset with what you perceive as an unfair distribution of wealth.
I asked you for some numbers that might make the situation better.
And you got mad. Sorry.
But you did post some funny pictures. Congratulations.
Other then some vague Occupy Wall Street carping I guess I don't see your point.
A small section at the top have most of the nation's wealth and pay most of the nations bills. Shocking.
I'm assuming you think this situation is bad. I also guess you think it would be better if we would just take more of it away from them, am I wrong here?
Just so we are clear, I'd hate to miss something surprisingly different coming from you.
WSS
-
So no thoughts in growing levels of income inequality? Wealth disparities? Shrinking middle class? Not a concern at all?
Not sure what would change this short of a Bastille reunion.
Not sure what would change this short of a Bastille reunion.
And that would only change it for a matter of months before heck and the people's Revolutionary Party took over and kept all the wealth for themselves.
" Same as it ever was"
WSS
-
-
When people talk about the need for the Republican Party to have more ideas that "government bad" and "cut taxes" this is what they're talking about.
And this is exclusive to the Republican Party?
And this is exclusive to the Republican Party?
It's a particular problem, yes. It's not to say that the Democrats are pure and good, or super substantive. In my mind they've been getting by far too long on "let's raise taxes on the wealthy." That's a small part of a larger discussion, and most Democrats treat that as if it's a solution. They've both got huge policy blind spots, but the Republicans have more, subjects they're simply not interested in discussing. For instance, the upcoming CPAC conference is missing any discussion of the topics of health care or inequality or poverty or welfare programs or wage stagnation. Most conservatives have no ideas about health care other than "We hate Obamacare." And they don't care about poverty.
I'm hardly the only person pointing this out. Lots of Republicans are doing it. They want to the Party to start engaging more, and driving the agenda. Right now they're not. They've got one organizing principle, and it's "I hate President Obama."
Or think about it this way: Republicans ran on the idea of "repealing and replacing" Obamacare. Remember that? This scared absolutely no one on the left, who knew they had no idea what to replace it with because they're simply not concerned with how to deal with the uninsured, at least not enough to come up with their own policy. It was just a campaign slogan. Really, ask any Republican member of Congress to tell you what their ideas for replacing Obamacare are and you're likely to get ...nothing.
Meanwhile, remember those scary Medicare cuts that Romney and Ryan ran on? The $716 billion that they vowed to put back if elected? Well, Ryan famously had them in his budget before he got picked, then suddenly he was against them once he was named to the ticket. And now that the election is over, Paul Ryan put out a new budget. I'll let you guess whether or not those Medicare cuts are counted in his budget now.
This isn't to say that there are no policy people on the right. There are. There are some very good ones. They're just not a whole lot of them, and they don't have much influence.
-
In my mind, any discussion about inequality starts with education. These are long term fixes. There's no Band-Aid. You've got a changing economy where people need more skills. Americans who have been to college are employed at a rate of 96.3%. There was never a recession for them. The question is how you find new jobs for the people who used to do the jobs that are now being replaced by automation, by cheaper labor overseas, by immigrants, etc., or eliminated entirely. There used to be lots of jobs for people with high school diplomas. There are fewer of them every year. What do you do with these people?
This is why you have lots of talk about community college programs and early education programs. Early education is hugely important. Kids education levels are basically set in stone at a very early age. Once they've gotten to age 7-8 they're pretty much done. The years from birth to age three are hugely important to brain development. Hell, pre-natal care is hugely important to brain development. This is why you see things like Obama's call for universal preschool. But even that (age four) might be too late. And it might be impossible to do on a nationwide scale. It might be money for nothing. Depends on how they structure it.
...But never mind any of that. I've been told I want to talk about how we steal more money from the rich because we're bitter.
Oh, look. Here I come now.
-
In my mind, any discussion about inequality starts with education. These are long term fixes. There's no Band-Aid. You've got a changing economy where people need more skills. Americans who have been to college are employed at a rate of 96.3%. There was never a recession for them. The question is how you find new jobs for the people who used to do the jobs that are now being replaced by automation, by cheaper labor overseas, by immigrants, etc., or eliminated entirely. There used to be lots of jobs for people with high school diplomas. There are fewer of them every year. What do you do with these people?
This is why you have lots of talk about community college programs and early education programs. Early education is hugely important. Kids education levels are basically set in stone at a very early age. Once they've gotten to age 7-8 they're pretty much done. The years from birth to age three are hugely important to brain development. Hell, pre-natal care is hugely important to brain development. This is why you see things like Obama's call for universal preschool. But even that (age four) might be too late. And it might be impossible to do on a nationwide scale. It might be money for nothing. Depends on how they structure it.
...But never mind any of that. I've been told I want to talk about how we steal more money from the rich because we're bitter.
Oh, look. Here I come now.
In my mind, any discussion about inequality starts with education. These are long term fixes. There's no Band-Aid. You've got a changing economy where people need more skills. Americans who have been to college are employed at a rate of 96.3%. There was never a recession for them. The question is how you find new jobs for the people who used to do the jobs that are now being replaced by automation, by cheaper labor overseas, by immigrants, etc., or eliminated entirely. There used to be lots of jobs for people with high school diplomas. There are fewer of them every year. What do you do with these people?
This is why you have lots of talk about community college programs and early education programs. Early education is hugely important. Kids education levels are basically set in stone at a very early age. Once they've gotten to age 7-8 they're pretty much done. The years from birth to age three are hugely important to brain development. Hell, pre-natal care is hugely important to brain development. This is why you see things like Obama's call for universal preschool. But even that (age four) might be too late. And it might be impossible to do on a nationwide scale. It might be money for nothing. Depends on how they structure it.
...But never mind any of that. I've been told I want to talk about how we steal more money from the rich because we're bitter.
Oh, look. Here I come now.
Pic of mz the pussy the pussy?
-
Wait, who is the messenger? Al Sharpton did this? Or you found a link to it from MSNBC? Those are two different things. I didn't find a link to it from MSNBC. I saw it on Andrew Sullivan's site.
And comparing the highest paid musicians is a bit apples and oranges. But I guess I didn't think you'd care. I thought you'd at least say it's not all that healthy, and then move on to how we shouldn't do anything about it.
How about tax policy? Does it inform you at all about tax policy? When we're looking to find revenue, does this make you think any differently about where you might get it?
Wait, who is the messenger? Al Sharpton did this? Or you found a link to it from MSNBC? Those are two different things. I didn't find a link to it from MSNBC. I saw it on Andrew Sullivan's site.
And comparing the highest paid musicians is a bit apples and oranges. But I guess I didn't think you'd care. I thought you'd at least say it's not all that healthy, and then move on to how we shouldn't do anything about it.
How about tax policy? Does it inform you at all about tax policy? When we're looking to find revenue, does this make you think any differently about where you might get it?
So there is your post tax policy I see not education not inequality nothing but tax policy. Great.
So you think that the disparity between rich and poor is bad, right?
And you think the problem lies in the education system?
( Or at least a good part of it)
Let's take a look at your friends in the Occupy Wall Street gang okay?
A good portion of them are younger college grads crying that they can't get a job with their new degrees.
Your solution? Have the government pay for more and more kids to take college classes.
Reduce the load put on them from taking those classes financially.
First of all giving away college money drastically increase is the cost of college.
We've seen that in spades.
And sorry kids, you are not going to make 6 figures with a sociology degree.
Probably not with art history, women's studies or even liberal arts.
But that's just the fraction of people smart enough to attend college classes at all.
So really the problem lies within the ever increasing number of children that wash through the system without being able to read or write on a fifth grade level.
Your solution? Get rid of standardized testing, eliminate charter schools add send more money to the teachers union.
Since teachers in all districts need to have basically the same education requirements it must be something else that makes kids at Hudson smarter than kids at JFK.
Do you suppose teachers in Hong Kong, Red China, South Korea, and India get paid lots more than US teachers? Do you suppose they have a sweeter benefits package?
Do you suppose that's why those kids are doing better?
Do you suppose children born to single parent households have a better or worse chance?
I realize that's a lot of supposing for you.
WSS
-
Steve, once again, you're arguing with someone who is not me, assuming you know my positions on these issues when you clearly don't. You just assume the cartoon and then get pissy about the cartoon. It's not interesting. I'd rather debate with my shoe.
Would be happy to talk about the tax policy aspects of it, but tend to doubt it'd be good to do with you.
I would wonder if Leg still thinks a national sales tax is the way to go when you look at how income is distributed in America. You'd be shifting the burden of the people on the right of the graph and putting it on the people on the left.
-
Steve, once again, you're arguing with someone who is not me, assuming you know my positions on these issues when you clearly don't. You just assume the cartoon and then get pissy about the cartoon. It's not interesting. I'd rather debate with my shoe.
Would be happy to talk about the tax policy aspects of it, but tend to doubt it'd be good to do with you.
I would wonder if Leg still thinks a national sales tax is the way to go when you look at how income is distributed in America. You'd be shifting the burden of the people on the right of the graph and putting it on the people on the left.
Steve, once again, you're arguing with someone who is not me, assuming you know my positions on these issues when you clearly don't. You just assume the cartoon and then get pissy about the cartoon. It's not interesting. I'd rather debate with my shoe.
At least you'd be on equal footing...
So if this is the 1 case in 1,000,000 that you are not completely in lockstep with the rhetorical and the campaign blather of the Democrat Party let's hear it.
It seems I recall you stating you wanted teachers salaries to double or at least be increased dramatically correct?
WSS
-
Plus I asked you what rates you think would make everybody happy.
And you immediately went to crank mode.
WSS
-
Let's take a look at your friends in the Occupy Wall Street gang okay? I don't remember attending any of these protests. I do remember writing pieces that said they were upset at the wrong things are almost entirely useless as a political movement. But you lump me in with them because, well, we know why.
A good portion of them are younger college grads crying that they can't get a job with their new degrees. This doesn't have anything to do with Occupy Wall Street. You just pick them out to find a target you can hate.
Your solution? Have the government pay for more and more kids to take college classes. No, it's not.
Reduce the load put on them from taking those classes financially. I'll let you straighten out the grammar on this one.
First of all giving away college money drastically increase is the cost of college. That's a useless generalization.
We've seen that in spades. You don't seem to have a handle on what's driving college costs.
And sorry kids, you are not going to make 6 figures with a sociology degree.
Probably not with art history, women's studies or even liberal arts. Sure, you can. Happens all the time. But what you're saying is that some majors should expect to make less than others. That's hardly revolutionary, or controversial, so pointing it out doesn't get us anywhere. Because no one is saying that the problem is art history majors.
So really the problem lies within the ever increasing number of children that wash through the system without being able to read or write on a fifth grade level. That's actually not true. We've had measurable gains in achievement. So the numbers aren't increasing, they're going down.
Your solution? Get rid of standardized testing, eliminate charter schools add send more money to the teachers union. Hahaha. Yes, this is my solution, you moron.
Since teachers in all districts need to have basically the same education requirements it must be something else that makes kids at Hudson smarter than kids at JFK.
Education requirements are not a good way to measure a teacher's quality. And I don't know who is arguing that teachers' education level is the only factor in education, so this point is beyond dumb.
Do you suppose teachers in Hong Kong, Red China, South Korea, and India get paid lots more than US teachers? Do you suppose they have a sweeter benefits package?
Do you suppose that's why those kids are doing better?
Do you suppose children born to single parent households have a better or worse chance?
I realize that's a lot of supposing for you.
Gee, I never thought you'd get it back to your two opinions about education, which are "I don't like people in the inner cities" and "I don't like teachers unions."
Like I said, let's not.
-
Steve, once again, you're arguing with someone who is not me, assuming you know my positions on these issues when you clearly don't. You just assume the cartoon and then get pissy about the cartoon. It's not interesting. I'd rather debate with my shoe.
At least you'd be on equal footing...
So if this is the 1 case in 1,000,000 that you are not completely in lockstep with the rhetorical and the campaign blather of the Democrat Party let's hear it.
It seems I recall you stating you wanted teachers salaries to double or at least be increased dramatically correct?
WSS
At least you'd be on equal footing...
So if this is the 1 case in 1,000,000 that you are not completely in lockstep with the rhetorical and the campaign blather of the Democrat Party let's hear it.
It seems I recall you stating you wanted teachers salaries to double or at least be increased dramatically correct?
WSS
Hahaha. No. No, I don't think teachers salaries should double or be increased dramatically.
-
Plus I asked you what rates you think would make everybody happy.
And you immediately went to crank mode.
WSS
Plus I asked you what rates you think would make everybody happy.
And you immediately went to crank mode.
WSS
Because it's a stupid question.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login