Fiscal Cliff: Avoid? Drive Right Over?

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
81

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:

[quote]jjackkrash wrote:

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:

I understand your position but you have to differentiate between programs. Medicare and things of that nature are not causing the problems. But the military budget - which includes the wars - are a major contributor. Other programs can be kept without any fiscal issues. But the military, corporate welfare and taxing the rich more will cure the problem.[/quote]

The US federal government was never able to tax at a level higher than about 18-20% for a sustained period of time, no matter what the nominal tax rate was.

So, no, “taxing” the rich wont solve anything, they simply will not get more money out of it.

[/quote]
Totally untrue. The U.S. nominal tax rate was much higher than 20% and it was collected. What were the tax rates between the 1950’s thru the 70’s? Far higher than today and we had a much stronger economy. This flies direstly in the face of “cut taxes on the rich and you will spur job growth” crowd. It is one of the U.S. greatest propaganda stories.

Taxing the rich will help along with butchering the bloated military budget. Cutting corporate welfare and helping the housing market stablize.[/quote]

Setting aside the potential “benefits to the economy” for a moment, at what point, in your opinion, does simply confiscating money from the wealthy morally cross the line from a legitimate tax to state-sponsored theft?

[/quote]

Setting aside your economic philosophy at what point do you think the top 1% were confiscating the money of the middle class and poor during the economic collapse of 2008?[/quote]

Anyone guilty of theft, looting, or fraud should go to jail and have all their assets confiscated to repay their victims. If we are talking specifically about the 2008 collapse, my list of suspects is very, very long. But that certainly doesn’t make anyone who makes more than 250k a year guilty of theft, looting, or fraud, guilty by association or justify simply taxing them at 90% and taking their money. Stealing is stealing and I don’t condone it no matter who benefits.

So, since I answered your question, when does simply confiscating money from the wealthy morally cross the line from a legitimate tax to state-sponsored theft?

83

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]jjackkrash wrote:

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:

[quote]jjackkrash wrote:

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:

I understand your position but you have to differentiate between programs. Medicare and things of that nature are not causing the problems. But the military budget - which includes the wars - are a major contributor. Other programs can be kept without any fiscal issues. But the military, corporate welfare and taxing the rich more will cure the problem.[/quote]

The US federal government was never able to tax at a level higher than about 18-20% for a sustained period of time, no matter what the nominal tax rate was.

So, no, “taxing” the rich wont solve anything, they simply will not get more money out of it.

[/quote]
Totally untrue. The U.S. nominal tax rate was much higher than 20% and it was collected. What were the tax rates between the 1950’s thru the 70’s? Far higher than today and we had a much stronger economy. This flies direstly in the face of “cut taxes on the rich and you will spur job growth” crowd. It is one of the U.S. greatest propaganda stories.

Taxing the rich will help along with butchering the bloated military budget. Cutting corporate welfare and helping the housing market stablize.[/quote]

Setting aside the potential “benefits to the economy” for a moment, at what point, in your opinion, does simply confiscating money from the wealthy morally cross the line from a legitimate tax to state-sponsored theft?

[/quote]

Setting aside your economic philosophy at what point do you think the top 1% were confiscating the money of the middle class and poor during the economic collapse of 2008?[/quote]

Anyone guilty of theft, looting, or fraud should go to jail and have all their assets confiscated to repay their victims. If we are talking specifically about the 2008 collapse, my list of suspects is very, very long. But that certainly doesn’t make anyone who makes more than 250k a year guilty of theft, looting, or fraud, guilty by association or justify simply taxing them at 90% and taking their money. Stealing is stealing and I don’t condone it no matter who benefits.

So, since I answered your question, when does simply confiscating money from the wealthy morally cross the line from a legitimate tax to state-sponsored theft?

[/quote]

You want my answer?[/quote]

Sure, I’d love to hear it.

84

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:

I understand your position but you have to differentiate between programs. Medicare and things of that nature are not causing the problems. But the military budget - which includes the wars - are a major contributor. Other programs can be kept without any fiscal issues. But the military, corporate welfare and taxing the rich more will cure the problem.[/quote]

The US federal government was never able to tax at a level higher than about 18-20% for a sustained period of time, no matter what the nominal tax rate was.

So, no, “taxing” the rich wont solve anything, they simply will not get more money out of it.

[/quote]
Totally untrue. The U.S. nominal tax rate was much higher than 20% and it was collected. What were the tax rates between the 1950’s thru the 70’s? Far higher than today and we had a much stronger economy. This flies direstly in the face of “cut taxes on the rich and you will spur job growth” crowd. It is one of the U.S. greatest propaganda stories.

Taxing the rich will help along with butchering the bloated military budget. Cutting corporate welfare and helping the housing market stablize.[/quote]

Nonsense.

Never, for any sustained period of time.

I could post statistics, but you dont care anyway.

Princesses, unicorns and whatnot.

[/quote/]

Unfortunately for you your ideology is nonsense.

No congruency with the evidence or truth.

I can post statistics as well but what you care about is your side winning, not the truth.

85

[quote]jjackkrash wrote:

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:

[quote]jjackkrash wrote:

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:

I understand your position but you have to differentiate between programs. Medicare and things of that nature are not causing the problems. But the military budget - which includes the wars - are a major contributor. Other programs can be kept without any fiscal issues. But the military, corporate welfare and taxing the rich more will cure the problem.[/quote]

The US federal government was never able to tax at a level higher than about 18-20% for a sustained period of time, no matter what the nominal tax rate was.

So, no, “taxing” the rich wont solve anything, they simply will not get more money out of it.

[/quote]
Totally untrue. The U.S. nominal tax rate was much higher than 20% and it was collected. What were the tax rates between the 1950’s thru the 70’s? Far higher than today and we had a much stronger economy. This flies direstly in the face of “cut taxes on the rich and you will spur job growth” crowd. It is one of the U.S. greatest propaganda stories.

Taxing the rich will help along with butchering the bloated military budget. Cutting corporate welfare and helping the housing market stablize.[/quote]

Setting aside the potential “benefits to the economy” for a moment, at what point, in your opinion, does simply confiscating money from the wealthy morally cross the line from a legitimate tax to state-sponsored theft?

[/quote]

Setting aside your economic philosophy at what point do you think the top 1% were confiscating the money of the middle class and poor during the economic collapse of 2008?[/quote]

Anyone guilty of theft, looting, or fraud should go to jail and have all their assets confiscated to repay their victims. If we are talking specifically about the 2008 collapse, my list of suspects is very, very long. But that certainly doesn’t make anyone who makes more than 250k a year guilty of theft, looting, or fraud, guilty by association or justify simply taxing them at 90% and taking their money. Stealing is stealing and I don’t condone it no matter who benefits.

So, since I answered your question, when does simply confiscating money from the wealthy morally cross the line from a legitimate tax to state-sponsored theft?

[/quote]

Let me ask you, when does simply confiscating money from the wealthy morally cross the line from a legitimate tax to state-sponsored theft?

86

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:

[quote]jjackkrash wrote:

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:

[quote]jjackkrash wrote:

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:

I understand your position but you have to differentiate between programs. Medicare and things of that nature are not causing the problems. But the military budget - which includes the wars - are a major contributor. Other programs can be kept without any fiscal issues. But the military, corporate welfare and taxing the rich more will cure the problem.[/quote]

The US federal government was never able to tax at a level higher than about 18-20% for a sustained period of time, no matter what the nominal tax rate was.

So, no, “taxing” the rich wont solve anything, they simply will not get more money out of it.

[/quote]
Totally untrue. The U.S. nominal tax rate was much higher than 20% and it was collected. What were the tax rates between the 1950’s thru the 70’s? Far higher than today and we had a much stronger economy. This flies direstly in the face of “cut taxes on the rich and you will spur job growth” crowd. It is one of the U.S. greatest propaganda stories.

Taxing the rich will help along with butchering the bloated military budget. Cutting corporate welfare and helping the housing market stablize.[/quote]

Setting aside the potential “benefits to the economy” for a moment, at what point, in your opinion, does simply confiscating money from the wealthy morally cross the line from a legitimate tax to state-sponsored theft?

[/quote]

Setting aside your economic philosophy at what point do you think the top 1% were confiscating the money of the middle class and poor during the economic collapse of 2008?[/quote]

Anyone guilty of theft, looting, or fraud should go to jail and have all their assets confiscated to repay their victims. If we are talking specifically about the 2008 collapse, my list of suspects is very, very long. But that certainly doesn’t make anyone who makes more than 250k a year guilty of theft, looting, or fraud, guilty by association or justify simply taxing them at 90% and taking their money. Stealing is stealing and I don’t condone it no matter who benefits.

So, since I answered your question, when does simply confiscating money from the wealthy morally cross the line from a legitimate tax to state-sponsored theft?

[/quote]

Let me ask you, when does simply confiscating money from the wealthy morally cross the line from a legitimate tax to state-sponsored theft?
[/quote]

It is not a theft, by the free marketers own standard. They are free to move to any country they like , many do not have any (ZERO)( NADA )taxes

87

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:

[quote]jjackkrash wrote:

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:

[quote]jjackkrash wrote:

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:

I understand your position but you have to differentiate between programs. Medicare and things of that nature are not causing the problems. But the military budget - which includes the wars - are a major contributor. Other programs can be kept without any fiscal issues. But the military, corporate welfare and taxing the rich more will cure the problem.[/quote]

The US federal government was never able to tax at a level higher than about 18-20% for a sustained period of time, no matter what the nominal tax rate was.

So, no, “taxing” the rich wont solve anything, they simply will not get more money out of it.

[/quote]
Totally untrue. The U.S. nominal tax rate was much higher than 20% and it was collected. What were the tax rates between the 1950’s thru the 70’s? Far higher than today and we had a much stronger economy. This flies direstly in the face of “cut taxes on the rich and you will spur job growth” crowd. It is one of the U.S. greatest propaganda stories.

Taxing the rich will help along with butchering the bloated military budget. Cutting corporate welfare and helping the housing market stablize.[/quote]

Setting aside the potential “benefits to the economy” for a moment, at what point, in your opinion, does simply confiscating money from the wealthy morally cross the line from a legitimate tax to state-sponsored theft?

[/quote]

Setting aside your economic philosophy at what point do you think the top 1% were confiscating the money of the middle class and poor during the economic collapse of 2008?[/quote]

Anyone guilty of theft, looting, or fraud should go to jail and have all their assets confiscated to repay their victims. If we are talking specifically about the 2008 collapse, my list of suspects is very, very long. But that certainly doesn’t make anyone who makes more than 250k a year guilty of theft, looting, or fraud, guilty by association or justify simply taxing them at 90% and taking their money. Stealing is stealing and I don’t condone it no matter who benefits.

So, since I answered your question, when does simply confiscating money from the wealthy morally cross the line from a legitimate tax to state-sponsored theft?

[/quote]

Let me ask you, when does simply confiscating money from the wealthy morally cross the line from a legitimate tax to state-sponsored theft?
[/quote]

I think that ship has sailed. The issue is complicated, but if we are going to have an income tax at all, the rate ought to be uniform with “deductions” designed solely to determine what “net” income actually is and not for other perceived policy reasons. I suppose I don’t have a huge problem with the rate starting at some minimum threshold of income tied to the poverty line. And if the rate needs to go up because we are in a national crisis, it needs to go up for everybody.

Everybody needs skin in the game because its too easy just to vote to take away someone else’s money. The idea that we can simply vote to confiscate money from a small segment of society based on “need” is morally wrong and a bad idea. I also think the government will always spend not only every dime it takes in, it will deficit spend as a matter of course. So the answer isn’t continuing to feed it more money.

Some things we probably agree on: (1) the military budget is too high; (2) the split between rich and poor and the shrinking middle class is a real problem; (3) corporate welfare is also a problem; and (4) big corporations can become so big and powerful that they take on some of the same bad attributes of an overwhelming big and powerful government, especially when they are closely tied in with the public sector and control policy.

I just don’t think using taxes to confiscate money is the answer to these problems or morally the right thing to do.

90

Don’t worry Pitt, they will leave, trust me on this.

Tax them enough, and they leave.

I am seeing this in action right here.

Silicon Valley companies are expanding…IN TEXAS.

Many of the big players have been invited by a very favorable business environment and tax rates.

INTEL (founded in Cali) are now expanding in Oregon, for the very reasons of excessive taxation and horrible regulation.

91

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]jjackkrash wrote:
…(2) the split between rich and poor and the shrinking middle class is a real problem… [/quote]

I’m not on board with this one. In the history of the planet the poor (in the USA) have never been richer.[/quote]As well as the rich

93

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:

[quote]jjackkrash wrote:

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:

[quote]jjackkrash wrote:

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:

I understand your position but you have to differentiate between programs. Medicare and things of that nature are not causing the problems. But the military budget - which includes the wars - are a major contributor. Other programs can be kept without any fiscal issues. But the military, corporate welfare and taxing the rich more will cure the problem.[/quote]

The US federal government was never able to tax at a level higher than about 18-20% for a sustained period of time, no matter what the nominal tax rate was.

So, no, “taxing” the rich wont solve anything, they simply will not get more money out of it.

[/quote]
Totally untrue. The U.S. nominal tax rate was much higher than 20% and it was collected. What were the tax rates between the 1950’s thru the 70’s? Far higher than today and we had a much stronger economy. This flies direstly in the face of “cut taxes on the rich and you will spur job growth” crowd. It is one of the U.S. greatest propaganda stories.

Taxing the rich will help along with butchering the bloated military budget. Cutting corporate welfare and helping the housing market stablize.[/quote]

Setting aside the potential “benefits to the economy” for a moment, at what point, in your opinion, does simply confiscating money from the wealthy morally cross the line from a legitimate tax to state-sponsored theft?

[/quote]

Setting aside your economic philosophy at what point do you think the top 1% were confiscating the money of the middle class and poor during the economic collapse of 2008?[/quote]

Anyone guilty of theft, looting, or fraud should go to jail and have all their assets confiscated to repay their victims. If we are talking specifically about the 2008 collapse, my list of suspects is very, very long. But that certainly doesn’t make anyone who makes more than 250k a year guilty of theft, looting, or fraud, guilty by association or justify simply taxing them at 90% and taking their money. Stealing is stealing and I don’t condone it no matter who benefits.

So, since I answered your question, when does simply confiscating money from the wealthy morally cross the line from a legitimate tax to state-sponsored theft?

[/quote]

Let me ask you, when does simply confiscating money from the wealthy morally cross the line from a legitimate tax to state-sponsored theft?
[/quote]

It is not a theft, by the free marketers own standard. They are free to move to any country they like , many do not have any (ZERO)( NADA )taxes
[/quote]

Horseshit.

94

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:

[quote]jjackkrash wrote:

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:

[quote]jjackkrash wrote:

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:

I understand your position but you have to differentiate between programs. Medicare and things of that nature are not causing the problems. But the military budget - which includes the wars - are a major contributor. Other programs can be kept without any fiscal issues. But the military, corporate welfare and taxing the rich more will cure the problem.[/quote]

The US federal government was never able to tax at a level higher than about 18-20% for a sustained period of time, no matter what the nominal tax rate was.

So, no, “taxing” the rich wont solve anything, they simply will not get more money out of it.

[/quote]
Totally untrue. The U.S. nominal tax rate was much higher than 20% and it was collected. What were the tax rates between the 1950’s thru the 70’s? Far higher than today and we had a much stronger economy. This flies direstly in the face of “cut taxes on the rich and you will spur job growth” crowd. It is one of the U.S. greatest propaganda stories.

Taxing the rich will help along with butchering the bloated military budget. Cutting corporate welfare and helping the housing market stablize.[/quote]

Setting aside the potential “benefits to the economy” for a moment, at what point, in your opinion, does simply confiscating money from the wealthy morally cross the line from a legitimate tax to state-sponsored theft?

[/quote]

Setting aside your economic philosophy at what point do you think the top 1% were confiscating the money of the middle class and poor during the economic collapse of 2008?[/quote]

Anyone guilty of theft, looting, or fraud should go to jail and have all their assets confiscated to repay their victims. If we are talking specifically about the 2008 collapse, my list of suspects is very, very long. But that certainly doesn’t make anyone who makes more than 250k a year guilty of theft, looting, or fraud, guilty by association or justify simply taxing them at 90% and taking their money. Stealing is stealing and I don’t condone it no matter who benefits.

So, since I answered your question, when does simply confiscating money from the wealthy morally cross the line from a legitimate tax to state-sponsored theft?

[/quote]

Let me ask you, when does simply confiscating money from the wealthy morally cross the line from a legitimate tax to state-sponsored theft?
[/quote]

It is not a theft, by the free marketers own standard. They are free to move to any country they like , many do not have any (ZERO)( NADA )taxes
[/quote]

Horseshit.[/quote]

I supposed I should have stipulated (INCOME TAX) sorry Albania and Afghanistan pay no personal income tax , have at it

95
96

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:

[quote]jjackkrash wrote:

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:

[quote]jjackkrash wrote:

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:

I understand your position but you have to differentiate between programs. Medicare and things of that nature are not causing the problems. But the military budget - which includes the wars - are a major contributor. Other programs can be kept without any fiscal issues. But the military, corporate welfare and taxing the rich more will cure the problem.[/quote]

The US federal government was never able to tax at a level higher than about 18-20% for a sustained period of time, no matter what the nominal tax rate was.

So, no, “taxing” the rich wont solve anything, they simply will not get more money out of it.

[/quote]
Totally untrue. The U.S. nominal tax rate was much higher than 20% and it was collected. What were the tax rates between the 1950’s thru the 70’s? Far higher than today and we had a much stronger economy. This flies direstly in the face of “cut taxes on the rich and you will spur job growth” crowd. It is one of the U.S. greatest propaganda stories.

Taxing the rich will help along with butchering the bloated military budget. Cutting corporate welfare and helping the housing market stablize.[/quote]

Setting aside the potential “benefits to the economy” for a moment, at what point, in your opinion, does simply confiscating money from the wealthy morally cross the line from a legitimate tax to state-sponsored theft?

[/quote]

Setting aside your economic philosophy at what point do you think the top 1% were confiscating the money of the middle class and poor during the economic collapse of 2008?[/quote]

Anyone guilty of theft, looting, or fraud should go to jail and have all their assets confiscated to repay their victims. If we are talking specifically about the 2008 collapse, my list of suspects is very, very long. But that certainly doesn’t make anyone who makes more than 250k a year guilty of theft, looting, or fraud, guilty by association or justify simply taxing them at 90% and taking their money. Stealing is stealing and I don’t condone it no matter who benefits.

So, since I answered your question, when does simply confiscating money from the wealthy morally cross the line from a legitimate tax to state-sponsored theft?

[/quote]

Let me ask you, when does simply confiscating money from the wealthy morally cross the line from a legitimate tax to state-sponsored theft?
[/quote]

It is not a theft, by the free marketers own standard. They are free to move to any country they like , many do not have any (ZERO)( NADA )taxes
[/quote]

Horseshit.[/quote]

I supposed I should have stipulated (INCOME TAX) sorry Albania and Afghanistan pay no personal income tax , have at it
[/quote]

No, I go to a company.

The government comes to me.

Street peddler - plantation.

They are not the same.

97

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:

[quote]jjackkrash wrote:

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:

[quote]jjackkrash wrote:

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:

I understand your position but you have to differentiate between programs. Medicare and things of that nature are not causing the problems. But the military budget - which includes the wars - are a major contributor. Other programs can be kept without any fiscal issues. But the military, corporate welfare and taxing the rich more will cure the problem.[/quote]

The US federal government was never able to tax at a level higher than about 18-20% for a sustained period of time, no matter what the nominal tax rate was.

So, no, “taxing” the rich wont solve anything, they simply will not get more money out of it.

[/quote]
Totally untrue. The U.S. nominal tax rate was much higher than 20% and it was collected. What were the tax rates between the 1950’s thru the 70’s? Far higher than today and we had a much stronger economy. This flies direstly in the face of “cut taxes on the rich and you will spur job growth” crowd. It is one of the U.S. greatest propaganda stories.

Taxing the rich will help along with butchering the bloated military budget. Cutting corporate welfare and helping the housing market stablize.[/quote]

Setting aside the potential “benefits to the economy” for a moment, at what point, in your opinion, does simply confiscating money from the wealthy morally cross the line from a legitimate tax to state-sponsored theft?

[/quote]

Setting aside your economic philosophy at what point do you think the top 1% were confiscating the money of the middle class and poor during the economic collapse of 2008?[/quote]

Anyone guilty of theft, looting, or fraud should go to jail and have all their assets confiscated to repay their victims. If we are talking specifically about the 2008 collapse, my list of suspects is very, very long. But that certainly doesn’t make anyone who makes more than 250k a year guilty of theft, looting, or fraud, guilty by association or justify simply taxing them at 90% and taking their money. Stealing is stealing and I don’t condone it no matter who benefits.

So, since I answered your question, when does simply confiscating money from the wealthy morally cross the line from a legitimate tax to state-sponsored theft?

[/quote]

Let me ask you, when does simply confiscating money from the wealthy morally cross the line from a legitimate tax to state-sponsored theft?
[/quote]

It is not a theft, by the free marketers own standard. They are free to move to any country they like , many do not have any (ZERO)( NADA )taxes
[/quote]

Horseshit.[/quote]

I supposed I should have stipulated (INCOME TAX) sorry Albania and Afghanistan pay no personal income tax , have at it
[/quote]

No, I go to a company.

The government comes to me.

Street peddler - plantation.

They are not the same. [/quote]

I do not understand what you are trying to say

98

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]jjackkrash wrote:
…(2) the split between rich and poor and the shrinking middle class is a real problem… [/quote]

I’m not on board with this one. In the history of the planet the poor (in the USA) have never been richer.[/quote]

I’m not sure if I am onboard with it or not yet, for the simple reason that I am not sure whether the gap is due to increased upwards mobility from “middle class” to “rich” (which would mean more middle class people are finding that “American Dream” as far as money goes) or because more middle class people are dropping into the poor bracket.

Also, I agree with your statement that the poor have never been richer in history in the USA (statistically speaking of course, there are very very poor people and homeless here too. But as a whole bracket). Any country where you can make less than the poverty line, still have a flatscreen and cable and a smartphone…you’re not that poor.

99

[quote]Aragorn wrote:

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]jjackkrash wrote:
…(2) the split between rich and poor and the shrinking middle class is a real problem… [/quote]

I’m not on board with this one. In the history of the planet the poor (in the USA) have never been richer.[/quote]

I’m not sure if I am onboard with it or not yet, for the simple reason that I am not sure whether the gap is due to increased upwards mobility from “middle class” to “rich” (which would mean more middle class people are finding that “American Dream” as far as money goes) or because more middle class people are dropping into the poor bracket.

Also, I agree with your statement that the poor have never been richer in history in the USA (statistically speaking of course, there are very very poor people and homeless here too. But as a whole bracket). Any country where you can make less than the poverty line, still have a flatscreen and cable and a smartphone…you’re not that poor.[/quote]

I think the middle class is trending toward shrinking and for the most part, not in a good way. Even if you disagree with this, however, I think we can agree the the focus should be on making the whole pie bigger rather than simply fighting over the percentage of the size of scraps from a shrinking or disappearing pie.

100

[quote]jjackkrash wrote:

[quote]Aragorn wrote:

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]jjackkrash wrote:
…(2) the split between rich and poor and the shrinking middle class is a real problem… [/quote]

I’m not on board with this one. In the history of the planet the poor (in the USA) have never been richer.[/quote]

I’m not sure if I am onboard with it or not yet, for the simple reason that I am not sure whether the gap is due to increased upwards mobility from “middle class” to “rich” (which would mean more middle class people are finding that “American Dream” as far as money goes) or because more middle class people are dropping into the poor bracket.

Also, I agree with your statement that the poor have never been richer in history in the USA (statistically speaking of course, there are very very poor people and homeless here too. But as a whole bracket). Any country where you can make less than the poverty line, still have a flatscreen and cable and a smartphone…you’re not that poor.[/quote]

I think the middle class is trending toward shrinking and for the most part, not in a good way. Even if you disagree with this, however, I think we can agree the the focus should be on making the whole pie bigger rather than simply fighting over the percentage of the size of scraps from a shrinking or disappearing pie.
[/quote]

I’ll agree with you wholeheartedly regarding the pie. As for the middle class, I am not talking specifically about post 2008. I know thats been a big dump for everyone. But I have been hearing the “disappearing middle class” line for probably 4 election cycles…and I am thinking the long term trend.