[besson3c]

In 2005, 48.5% of all reported income in the U.S. belonged to the top 10% of income earners, which means that the other 90% of the country shared about 50% of the rest of the country's reported income. The top 1% received 21.8% of the country's income.

Astounding, huh? These are very close to 1920's pre stock market crash numbers.

[Railroader]

Interesting Factoid: Your like marden, except without the quoting of the sources.

[BlueSky]

Interesting Factoid: RailRoader, Jesus would slap you silly.

[OldManMac]

Although I'm obviously not besson3c, I'll chime in. This really shouldn't surprise anyone, as the gap between the haves and have nots has been increasing for a long time.

http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/03/...s/income.4.php

Income inequality grew significantly in 2005, with the top 1 percent of Americans - those with incomes that year of more than $348,000 - receiving their largest share of national income since 1928, analysis of newly released tax data shows.

The top 10 percent, roughly those earning more than $100,000, also reached a level of income share not seen since before the Depression.

While total reported income in the United States increased almost 9 percent in 2005, the most recent year for which such data is available, average incomes for those in the bottom 90 percent dipped slightly compared with the year before, dropping $172, or 0.6 percent.

The gains went largely to the top 1 percent, whose incomes rose to an average of more than $1.1 million each, an increase of more than $139,000, or about 14 percent.

The new data also shows that the top 300,000 Americans collectively enjoyed almost as much income as the bottom 150 million Americans. Per person, the top group received 440 times as much as the average person in the bottom half earned, nearly doubling the gap from 1980.

Emmanuel Saez, an economist at the University of California, Berkeley, who analyzed the Internal Revenue Service data with Thomas Piketty of the Paris School of Economics, said such growing disparities were significant in terms of social and political stability.

Last year, according to data from other sources, incomes for average Americans increased for the first time in several years. But because those at the top rely heavily on the stock market and business profits for their income, both of which were strong last year, it is likely that the disparities in 2005 are the same or larger now.

The disparities may be even greater for another reason. The Internal Revenue Service estimates that it is able to accurately tax 99 percent of wage income but that it captures only about 70 percent of business and investment income, most of which flows to upper-income individuals, because not everybody accurately reports such figures.

The Bush administration argued that its tax policies, despite cuts that benefited those at the top more than others, had not added to the widening gap but "made the tax code more progressive, not less." Brookly McLaughlin, the chief spokeswoman at the Treasury Department, said that this year "the share of income taxes paid by lower-income taxpayers will be lower than it would have been without the tax relief, while the share of income taxes for higher-income taxpayers will be higher."

Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson Jr., she noted, has acknowledged that income disparities have increased, but, along with a "solid consensus" of experts, attributed that shift largely to "the rapid pace of technological change has been a major driver in the decades-long widening of the income gap in the United States."

Others argued that public policies had played a role in the shift. Robert Greenstein, executive director of the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, an advocacy group for the poor, said the data understated the widening disparity between the top 1 percent and the rest of the country.

He said that in addition to rising incomes and reduced taxes, the equation should take into account cuts in fringe benefits to workers and in government services that middle-class and poor Americans rely on more than the affluent. These include health care, child care and education spending. The analysis by the two professors showed that the top 10 percent of Americans collected 48.5 percent of all reported income in 2005.

That is an increase of more than 2 percentage points over the previous year and up from roughly 33 percent in the late 1970s. The peak for this group was 49.3 percent in 1928. A major issue likely to be debated in Congress in the year ahead is whether reversing the Bush tax cuts would slow investment and, if so, how much that would cost the economy

[zro]

If we weren't all on double-secret probation I'd say something rather... rash.

[MM-o4]

why is it an 'oid' not just a fact?

[design219]

why is it an 'oid' not just a fact?

Because CNN likes to creates new words.

[Dakar²]

Remember, an income gap isn't the problem. Lazy people, that's the problem.

Edit: And yeah, send this off the the PL

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by Railroader 

Interesting Factoid: Your like marden, except without the quoting of the sources.

Maybe they will ban him for posting stuff like this in the lounge too.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by Dakar² 

Remember, an income gap isn't the problem. Lazy people, that's the problem.

Well people who don't want to take responsibilities for their actions, and or thinks the "world" owes them something just for existing.

These people are usually lazy too so...

[Dakar²]

That bottom 90% better get crackin'!

[screamingFit]

Originally Posted by Kevin 

Well people who don't want to take responsibilities for their actions, and or thinks the "world" owes them something just for existing.

These people are usually lazy too so...

Yeah, lazy because the economy is in the gutter, there are no jobs to be had that one can get because you're too overqualified for what is available.

Granted, some people are lazy but a lot of people are the product of downsizing/layoffs and can't find work.

How many homeless people do you know? I know quite a few and all are new at being homeless and most are college educated - and far from lazy.

[besson3c]

So, I just want to know this.. Where is all of this heading? Will this lead to some sort of revolution where the unrestricted and unfettered free market is no longer cherished as an ideal that most Americans share?

If America is 300,000,000 people, we're talking about 270,000,000 people that have to make due (do?!) with half of the country's money... They would fall in that poor/middle class/moderately rich category.

I wonder what percentage of that 30,000,000 is actors and athletes?

[Dakar²]

The NBA has roughly 400 players, but since the Veteran's minimum is like 1.1 mil, I'd say there's a significant group making less than a mil. Extrapolate that to other sports how you will.

Edit: In other words, multi-million dollar athletes account for < .1% of that 30,000,000

[lpkmckenna]

You've provided two separate facts.

Originally Posted by besson3c 

"In 2005, 48.5% of all reported income in the U.S. belonged to the top 10% of income earners..."

"These are very close to 1920's pre stock market crash numbers."

What does the second have to do with the first?

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Dakar² 

The NBA has roughly 400 players, but since the Veteran's minimum is like 1.1 mil, I'd say there's a significant group making less than a mil. Extrapolate that to other sports how you will.

Edit: In other words, multi-million dollar athletes account for < .1% of that 30,000,000

Probably true, although incidentally a bench player in MLB can make $800,000.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by lpkmckenna 

You've provided two separate facts.

What does the second have to do with the first?

Back in the 1920's, around the same percentage of the wealth (actually slightly higher) went to the top 10% income earners. Was this not one of the things that led to the crash?

I'm not saying that we are due for a crash in the same way though since our economy has more checks and balances and stuff, but surely us continuing in this fashion will have some detrimental effect on society. I'm trying to determine what this might be...

You know how they say that big companies collapse because of their own doing (e.g. many say that Microsoft's worst enemy is themselves)? Wouldn't it be ironic if the US fell as a superpower in part because they started investing most of their money into foreign economies?

In history, no dynasty has lasted forever. I do believe that the US will not remain a superpower forever...

Digressing a little, but perhaps this gives us something more to talk about in here.

[centerchannel68]

Originally Posted by Railroader 

Interesting Factoid: Your like marden, except without the quoting of the sources.

Interesting factoid: Your is not the same as you're.

[centerchannel68]

Originally Posted by Kevin 

Well people who don't want to take responsibilities for their actions, and or thinks the "world" owes them something just for existing.

These people are usually lazy too so...

Exacty. Or people who don't take the responsibility of their own life, and instead depend on some outside supernatural force to come 'fix' their lives for them.

[lpkmckenna]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

Back in the 1920's, around the same percentage of the wealth (actually slightly higher) went to the top 10% income earners. Was this not one of the things that led to the crash?

No. The crash was caused by policies of the Fed Reserve Bank. A lousy Wikipedia reference.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by screamingFit 

Yeah, lazy because the economy is in the gutter, there are no jobs to be had that one can get because you're too overqualified for what is available.

Someone is stuck back in 2001.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by centerchannel68 

Exacty. Or people who don't take the responsibility of their own life, and instead depend on some outside supernatural force to come 'fix' their lives for them.

Rob proving yet again he has no clue™ what it is about.

None.

[sek929]

Well we've got.

Grammar Policing
Christian-bashing
Character-flaw posting
Marden has been mentioned

Yup, we've got a lounge thread here folks...

[Dakar²]

Originally Posted by sek929 

Well we've got.

Grammar Policing
Christian-bashing
Character-flaw posting
Marden has been mentioned

Yup, we've got a lounge thread here folks...

Needs Salt.

[olePigeon]

I heard a rumor that Salty is gay.

[sek929]

Let's see, I smoke pot...

Ok now drugs have been mentioned.

Let's see, I think Pelosi is a terrorist.

Good, good.




Abortion, DRM, Jimmy Carter, Barbra Streisand!!

broil for 4 hours and you've got NN Stew, serves one hundred thousand.

[besson3c]

Why is it that the Marden threads about David Bowie and Anna Benson used to go for 20 pages, but mine don't?

[Gossamer]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

Why is it that the Marden threads about David Bowie and Anna Benson used to go for 20 pages, but mine don't?

You're just not as dedicated. And you post too much of your own opinion.

[Dakar²]

You don't make outlandish enough claims, you don't dodge answering post that potentially skewer your points, and you don't make enough personal attacks (You make lame jokes, but you don't insert them into your posts enough).

Also, you obviously haven't pissed off enough people.
Remember, 1 in 10 marden threads went 10 pages. The trick is to post en masse. Eventually you'll get it right.

[besson3c]

[besson3c]

Anyway, any predictions on where all of this will lead us to?

[Dakar²]

Lock-down?

[centerchannel68]

Salvation?

[OldManMac]

Originally Posted by Dakar² 

You don't make outlandish enough claims, you don't dodge answering post that potentially skewer your points, and you don't make enough personal attacks (You make lame jokes, but you don't insert them into your posts enough).

Also, you obviously haven't pissed off enough people.
Remember, 1 in 10 marden threads went 10 pages. The trick is to post en masse. Eventually you'll get it right.

[RAILhead]

We need some new pics of Cody Dawg in her bikini (i've posted the word "bikini" on these forums twice today).

[screamingFit]

Originally Posted by Kevin 

Someone is stuck back in 2001.

Come on up to Detroit and I'll introduce you to five homeless friends - all college educated and once gainfully employed - until within the past two years. They don't have the money for rent and don't have the money to leave.

I guess they could collect some cans and thumb it to another region...

[RAILhead]

Originally Posted by screamingFit 

Come on up to Detroit and I'll introduce you to five homeless friends - all college educated and once gainfully employed - until within the past two years. They don't have the money for rent and don't have the money to leave.

I guess they could collect some cans and thumb it to another region...

Not to be a jerk, but there aren't any McDonalds, Sonics, Wendy's, Burger Kings, Wal-Marts, K-Marts, sanitation companies, etc., in Detroit?

[Railroader]

Originally Posted by screamingFit 

Come on up to Detroit and I'll introduce you to five homeless friends - all college educated and once gainfully employed - until within the past two years. They don't have the money for rent and don't have the money to leave.

I guess they could collect some cans and thumb it to another region...

I am extremely farmiliar with Detroit and the surrounding area. All I can say is you have some loser friends.

I think RAILhead hit the nail on the head.

[besson3c]

Anyway, I hope you guys enjoyed my sharing of these facts!

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by Railroader 

I am extremely farmiliar with Detroit and the surrounding area. All I can say is you have some loser friends.

I think RAILhead hit the nail on the head.

Aren't you the one who was saying McDonalds pays like $15/hour or some absurd amount to start in your area?

[Captain Obvious]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

Anyway, any predictions on where all of this will lead us to?

It will lead to a good sharp kick of reality for our society. It will force us come to terms with the fact that the dribble perpetuated by the baby boomer generation was always a bunch of crap. Everyone is not equal and the size of your piece of the pie is sometimes going to be smaller than the guy's who is sitting next to you.

The generation born to the children of the depression fostered a sense of entitlement and excess in our national psyche that will take another 50 years to get under control. They did not inherit their parents work ethic nor their sensibility about saving and spending and as a result we have many more problems than we should have. Jobs haven't gone away just because the greedy corporations wanted to make more money. They went away because people with no advanced skills wanted dental insurance, stock options, and 4 weeks paid vacation in addition to union inflated wages all because they felt they were due those things.

When an entire society spends money they don't have and feels they deserve more than they have worked for you are going to have a problem. Despite what you have heard since the 50s there will always be classes of people and pretending that everyone is on the same tier is going to cause unreal expectations and embitterment when you have to come to terms that not everyone is a Rockefeller.

But here's the bright side. The U.S. still offers a better chance for upward mobility than most other large nations. People just need to get over the belief that Americans are too good to mop floors and clean toilets. Not everyone will make it up from the station they were born into but your opportunities are much better than if you were born in Sub-Saharan Africa.

Also Besson, your allusion makes it seem like the top 10% all are billionaires and the remaining 90% are living in cardboard boxes. That is not remotely the truth. The distribution of wealth is far more spread out than you want it to seem with this thread.

[Railroader]

Originally Posted by Chuckit 

Aren't you the one who was saying McDonalds pays like $15/hour or some absurd amount to start in your area?

No. Your being a little absurd.

But it's nice that you bring it up, Detroit Area McDs do pay more than the rest of the state of Michigan.

[centerchannel68]

Originally Posted by Captain Obvious 

It will lead to a good sharp kick of reality for our society. It will force us come to terms with the fact that the dribble perpetuated by the baby boomer generation was always a bunch of crap. Everyone is not equal and the size of your piece of the pie is sometimes going to be smaller than the guy's who is sitting next to you.

The generation born to the children of the depression fostered a sense of entitlement and excess in our national psyche that will take another 50 years to get under control. They did not inherit their parents work ethic nor their sensibility about saving and spending and as a result we have many more problems than we should have. Jobs haven't gone away just because the greedy corporations wanted to make more money. They went away because people with no advanced skills wanted dental insurance, stock options, and 4 weeks paid vacation in addition to union inflated wages all because they felt they were due those things.

When an entire society spends money they don't have and feels they deserve more than they have worked for you are going to have a problem. Despite what you have heard since the 50s there will always be classes of people and pretending that everyone is on the same tier is going to cause unreal expectations and embitterment when you have to come to terms that not everyone is a Rockefeller.

But here's the bright side. The U.S. still offers a better chance for upward mobility than most other large nations. People just need to get over the belief that Americans are too good to mop floors and clean toilets. Not everyone will make it up from the station they were born into but your opportunities are much better than if you were born in Sub-Saharan Africa.

Also Besson, your allusion makes it seem like the top 10% all are billionaires and the remaining 90% are living in cardboard boxes. That is not remotely the truth. The distribution of wealth is far more spread out than you want it to seem with this thread.

I agree.... however, I also feel that big companies are ruining things in the upper tier of the white collar workforce. Oh, hello Mister Director of whatever, you're getting a $3.3 million dollar bonus! Oh hello Mr. Ford Bigtime guy! Even though ford is in huge trouble, we're giving you a $2 million dollar bonus at the end of the year! Oh hello mr Generic medium sizedcompany exec, we're giving you a $250,000 bonus!

Bonuses PISS me off. Salaries are the way they are for a reason. Getting a SMALL bonus for Xmas, that's nice....but getting a bonus bigger than the average person makes in a year? That's ****ing bullshit. People should work at their jobs and expect their salary, and getting a HUGE freakin bonus does not make sense, as nobody I've ever heard of worked "EXTRA" enough to demand that much "EXTRA" money. If someone is good at their job, sweet. Give them a raise. If someone is really going the extra mile, fine give them a bonus, but as far as I'm concerned those huge corporate bonuses are just crap, and show the real disconnect between big business execs and the rest of the world that actually WORKS for a living.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

Why is it that the Marden threads about David Bowie and Anna Benson used to go for 20 pages, but mine don't?

Those obsessed with marden kept them going?

Originally Posted by screamingFit 

Come on up to Detroit and I'll introduce you to five homeless friends - all college educated and once gainfully employed - until within the past two years. They don't have the money for rent and don't have the money to leave.

I guess they could collect some cans and thumb it to another region...

I never said homeless people didn't exist. So why are you forming your argument as if I did?

[screamingFit]

Originally Posted by Kevin 

I never said homeless people didn't exist. So why are you forming your argument as if I did?

It was in response to you saying that I "was stuck in 2001". How else was I supposed to take that?

[screamingFit]

Originally Posted by Railroader 

I am extremely farmiliar with Detroit and the surrounding area. All I can say is you have some loser friends.

I think RAILhead hit the nail on the head.

OK RR - you're a skilled laborer by trader, right? With that type of experience, for fun, go and fill out some applications at your local $7.00 an hour and under stores and TRY to get a job. Just for fun, mind you. If by some dumb miracle they think you are worth the risk and you actually get that job, try to support your family on that. You can't. Even if your wife was to get the same type of job and you had two incomes, you can't.

I am going to assume you've never been poor. Because you have NO idea what it's like. And, I know you're "familiar" with Detroit but being stuck two hours away in a one-horse boonie town is not even close.

[centerchannel68]

Originally Posted by screamingFit 

OK RR - you're a skilled laborer by trader, right? With that type of experience, for fun, go and fill out some applications at your local $7.00 an hour and under stores and TRY to get a job. Just for fun, mind you. If by some dumb miracle they think you are worth the risk and you actually get that job, try to support your family on that. You can't. Even if your wife was to get the same type of job and you had two incomes, you can't.

I am going to assume you've never been poor. Because you have NO idea what it's like. And, I know you're "familiar" with Detroit but being stuck two hours away in a one-horse boonie town is not even close.

But you aren't SUPPOSED to support your family on that. The $7 an hour jobs are for the slightly retarded people and teenagers. Society wants you to learn a skilled trade AFTER that so you can get a job that pays better than $7 an hour.

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

Why is it that the Marden threads about David Bowie and Anna Benson used to go for 20 pages, but mine don't?

Because about 75% of the posts in marden's threads were marden, whereas you make up about 10% of the posts in this thread.

[screamingFit]

Originally Posted by centerchannel68 

But you aren't SUPPOSED to support your family on that. The $7 an hour jobs are for the slightly retarded people and teenagers. Society wants you to learn a skilled trade AFTER that so you can get a job that pays better than $7 an hour.

Ahhh, the view of reality through the eyes of a sheltered child...

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by centerchannel68 

But you aren't SUPPOSED to support your family on that. The $7 an hour jobs are for the slightly retarded people and teenagers. Society wants you to learn a skilled trade AFTER that so you can get a job that pays better than $7 an hour.

What about all of the disabled workers? What percentage of workers do you think have a disability? I bet it's higher than you think...

My point is that this is a poor generalization, as most always are.