Income Inequality in America

Whether it's higher prices on products and services we consume, or higher taxes we're asked to pay, for each individual/business there is a point at which we behave differently. We might buy less, buy different, even steal more and with taxes we might look at more exemptions/credits, hide income, cheat, etc. because our goal is to pay the same we always paid because we typically don't have extra cash. IMO only when the economy is great, when more are working, when more have extra cash on hand, will we accept inflation on products and services or agreeably pay higher taxes.

- - - Updated - - -

And you kind of own the land below and the air above...

 

But in the process of rising prices there is less consumption just as IMO as tax rates increase less taxes as a percentage will be paid. The primary difference between your store and taxes is that the store will adjust prices while government won't adjust tax rates...

 

For maybe 30 years now Japanese automobiles have rated the highest quality of all manufacturers...this is not atrocious? Just about all electronics are manufactured off-shore...this is not atrocious? Some of the finest musical instruments are produced off-shore...this is not atrocious?

 

Obviously you don't know much about business. If a business is not profitable, either it must change something or close the doors. If YOU wish to tax companies and place tariffs this might make you happy, however, from the business perspective it is required to generate profits, so if the business cannot raise prices to offset higher expenses, then they close the doors. And...you need to know in this process, that all business expenses are passed to the consumer in the price of products and services; this means business will raise their prices until the consumers disappear, which is inflation, and when the consumers disappear they will simply close the doors...

 

Baloney, and Bah Humbug.

 

Sony

The Mayor has had NO problems with anything Sony has made, not in the last 30 years.

 

Bull(*)(*)(*)(*). If that were the case, Americans wouldn't buy it, presuming some American company made a comparable product, which usually isn't the case.

Okay. As soon as you get the spoiled Americans to assemble electronics for Chinese wages.

Not having US workers (can't call them Americans, they'd probably be goonionized) in the manufacturing process keeps the prices less than astronomical, making it possible for Americans to buy them.

 

Under the "Official Poverty" scam, people living in "poverty" get upwards of $30,000 a year in tax-free handouts, making it the equivalent of nearly $45,000 a year annual income.

People living in real poverty are poor.

 

Apple, Inc.


​

 

No, but it does justify any infrastructure for which it finances.

What I do know is, you have a warped idea about infrastructure and production. Yes, taxes are a transfer of wealth, to the state to pay for all the services rendered.

There you go, calling me a liar again, when in fact everything I said can be verified as truth.

Most land owners simply have a home on their land, and the pay taxes for the right. Those that choose to rent out their land to those who would produce are also contributing.

Bah humbug! Your attempts to denigrate landowners falls flat.

Wrong again. Rent seeking is trying to gain benefits such as loan subsidies, grants or tariff protection. These activities don't create any benefit for society, they just redistribute resources from the taxpayers to the special-interest group. Landowners are not the most relevant entities doing that. for loan subsidies, grants or tariff protection. These activities don't create any benefit for society, they just redistribute resources from the taxpayers to the special-interest group.

Landowners who farm produce a lot toward the GDP. Those who choose to lease their land to industry also contribute to the GDP.

Wow, one of the two who comes to virtually any economic thread and choose not to discuss the subject at hand, calling me a stalker?

Edit/Remove personal info/Stop this practice. I am not stalking, you are, and you destroy the usefulness of every thread you post in talking about a dead subject not the OP and without understanding how wrong you are.

 

Good post! It tells it like it is.

- - - Updated - - -

Are you one of those "border" liberals who believes that American workers are more deserving of an honest living?

 

Sure, and destroy our economic progress in the process.

So you teach economics and you don't understand the Laffer Curve?

 

Who paid for that rapid transit line? The company making a profit from it? Or the government with money paid for in taxes?

More commercial enterprise.

The only parasites are the ones who use the infrastructure paid for by landowner taxes or private enterprise without themselves paying for the infrastructure they use.

Which in most cases is reasonable, either for the selling price or the rental cost.

Your explanation is bullcrap. When a person invests in land they have the perfect right to receive reasonable rent.

I have communicated with you and your absurdity.

- - - Updated - - -

Making the move uneconomical will do nothing but harm our economic progression.

 

Sansui, Panasonic, Sony, all making products many of which are not even made in the US anymore.

 

Effectively yes! Once I breath the air it is mine, and mine alone. I bought and paid for my land, including the mineral rights beneath the land. I even own the sunshine which falls on my solar collectors as has been determined in court.

I am particularly proud of an investment of land I made years ago in Lafayette, LA. I bought a share in a piece of land on which Burger King chose to net lease and build a restaurant. Not only is my investment participating in production (food), profits for a private company, it is paying income for me.

(BTW, in the event anyone does not know what a net lease is, it is a rental/lease agreement which requires THE TENANT TO PAY ALL TAXES. Landowners with a grain of sense always recoup their costs, whether they are improvements or taxes from the tenant.

 

So, a man buys a lot of land expecting that at some point a community will want to live there. His name is dnsmith. As people move on to his turf, he starts to collect money from them for the use of his land, land that would've been free if he didn't exist. The community builds houses, a church, roads, and builds a facility to generate electricity for them, and so on. As these are built, naturally, he charges more rent to the community for the privilege of living there, although he has contributed nothing. He gives back a small portion of the rent he collects for doing nothing so that he can pretend that he contributes and manipulate the community into believing him. One member of the community gets outraged at the idea that this man extracts so much money from their little economy although he contributes nothing. The landowning conman's reply: "I paid for all of this! I built this! I pay far more taxes than you do! Don't you try and live like a parasite off me. You should thank me for giving you all this land and paying all these taxes!". Yet 49.5% of the time he was asleep and 49.5% of the time he was sipping pina colada on a beach somewhere (He spend 1% of the time collecting all the rent.) This conman would have you believe that it was HIS CONTRIBUTIONS rather than his TENANT'S CONTRIBUTIONS which made the location such a nice place to live, that he small portion of rent he gives back to the community represents and exists because HIS CONTRIBUTIONS rather than the contributions of HIS TENANTS.

 

Your first fallacy is the presumption that the land would be free to anyone else if I didn't exist. I have to buy the land, so it absolutely would not have been free as you suggest.

Which people pay for.

Which likely as not I helped pay for.

Which I pay for my share with by paying taxes or paying for the services received.

If someone wants to occupy my land they rightfully should pay rent.

Total fallacy, as I pay taxes for all of the improvements in infrastructure.

When I own the land I never "do nothing." 1. I paid for the land. 2. I pay taxes on the land which helps build the infrastructure.

Anyone who gets outraged because I bought and paid for the land and taxes for the infrastructure is obviously a parasite using the infrastructure I helped pay for and wants something from me for nothing.

 

I have an old Sony camcorder. Still works fine. I also have a new small stereo (CD, cassette, radio). Sounds great but hasn't been tested by time yet. Yeah. Sony. I think that might be the ONE.

 

Ibanez. Toshiba. Panasonic. LG. JVC. Fuji.

 

In addition, there are many clothing manufacturers who produce fine clothing as a fraction of the cost that bloated American labor produces. I guess you chose not to read this link. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2012/07/12/study-offshoring-creates-as-many-u-s-jobs-as-it-kills/

- - - Updated - - -

Or Korean, like Hyundai, which has the best warranty in the auto industry.

What happened to the "like this post" button?

 

The results would be manufacturers remaining in the US, and millions more US residents employed, and thereby spending their paychecks in their US stores (AKA the economy). Sounds like a big help to our economic progression. Also, helps by the additional US manufacturers ordering parts form other US manufacturers. Local business creates more local business. Just don't hire foreign workers, that's all, or you'll be right back into outsourcing (domestic outsourcing) with the paycheck $$$ being wired out of the country.

 

A liberal who believes that human beings in one country deserve a living way more than human beings in another country is not really a liberal at all. He is a fake progressive.

 

You still have not read http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2012/07/12/study-offshoring-creates-as-many-u-s-jobs-as-it-kills/ Out sourcing creates job here as well, and based on studies of outsourcing US jobs have not lost much in the way of wage as well and not losing jobs.

 

A few years ago I bought 2 pairs of jeans > Faded Glory (then made in USA) and Wrangler (made in Mexico). The Mexican jeans literally fell apart (metal parts and fraying at the bottom) in less than 2 years. I still have the faded Glory jeans, 100% intact, after years of wearing and washing.

The Wrangler (Mexican) jeans were $14. The US made Faded Glory ones were $12. I wish they still made Faded Glory in the US, but maybe if I searched the internet I could find plenty of US clothing manufacturers. No need to buy this foreign trash. It stands to reason. The guys who move away to cut costs, are going to cut costs in other ways as well. That's their mindset. And it shows up in the lack of quality.

 

Nice little anecdote. My experience has been totally different. The clothes offered at local stores in the area are mostly foreign made, and every bit as good as those made in the US. Van Huesen and Arrow shirts are good quality shirts, most of which are manufactured off shore. I simply do not buy your argument at all. I have gotten poorly made goods manufactured here in the US as well as other countries. Labor intensive jobs are frequently the ones exported to countries with lower wages and their products tend to be every bit as good. In addition, like jobs exported to India, their new jobs have created 300 million new middle class Indians who are becoming customers of some of our goods and services; and in my opinion in addition since we did not net lose jobs we are helping impoverished people to have jobs they deserve as much as the labor force in the US. Humans are humans and no one country's humans are any better or worse than any other country's humans.