"Study: The widening gap between the rich and the rest of us is ‘unsustainable’"

Study: The widening gap between the rich and the rest of us is ‘unsustainable’
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/09/...the-rich-and-the-rest-of-us-is-unsustainable/

----------------------------------------------------------
Indeed, the rich keep getting richer and the Middle Class and lower class getting poorer. Except for the wealthy, there is great inequity for these two other classes of people and that can't be helping the American economy much at all. When there is great disparity as we're seeing in this report from Harvard then ultimately consumer confidence can only go down and when that happens their despair can only be reflective at the ballot box. Therefore, we have to ask again, which political party really pulls for the common folks the most? I think most people know the answer: The Democrats.

 

Sorry my friend but as a resident of Vermont I've seen and lived the policy blunders driven by Democrats and Bernie Sanders. We've seen an explosion in income disparity, fueled by a loss of jobs flossed from the state through cumbersome regulations, higher taxes and an anti business environment.

Cheers
Labour

 

Sorry my friend, but we've all lived through the policy blunders driven by the Republicans Reagan, Bush and Bush that resulted in the explosion of income disparity AND a recession that Bernanke has called WORSE than the Great Depression, flossed by federal de-regulation, lower taxes, and a pro-business environment.

Say, what is the population of Vermont relative to the population of the United States?

 

Right, if it won't work in the microcosm that is Vermont, with just a half a million in population and wholly controlled by Democrats and their policies, it won't work in the macro.

Cheers
Labour

 

more income inequity propaganda rhetoric that its only purpose is to cause envy and class warfare to divide us for a political purpose

please explain why does some arbitrary gap needs to be closed to bring people out of poverty. unless you are under the false belief that wealth is finite there for has to be redistributed to do so

 

And I'm living in Kansas under tender mistrations of republican governor Sam Brown back with a super majority in both houses. The republican wet dream that was going to show us all how well the conservatives could run a state if they were just allowed to.

Ain't going' so swell for him.

 

And if you think that's bad, just wait till the Republicans seize control, God forbid, and then you'll really see people left with absolutely nothing standing in the middle of the street holding their front with one hand and their rear with the other.

 

Your state should have voted for KANG!

 

WTF is KANG?

 

Gap between rich and poor. Widening gap between rich and poor. Don't fall for this crap. Just get out there and make as much money as you can and stop worrying about others' wealth. This dividing tactic has been going on since the beginning of time. All it does is work on one of your human faults -- jealously. If I make $50,000 a year and Mr. Smith makes $50 million a year why is it his fault that there is such a gap in our wealth? He is making as much as he can and I'm making as much as I can. I should be proud of Mr. Smith and try to emulate what he is doing to be so successful.

 

Well, of course wealth is finite; It depends on the demand and avaibility of ressources. There is no "infinite" market.

 

The dividing tactics were in place for much longer. In the economically robust 50s, a "rich man" paid much more in taxes and didn't make about 1000 times the salary of one of his employee. Most often too, these rich guys were builders, decision -makers and investors. Nowadays these guys are nothing but crones that have an offshore account, more driven by easy and fast cashmaking than a durable solution. And it will be these kind of excesses that will kill capitalism.

In the US , what makes it worse is that there is no limits to political party financing - opening the door for corruption. So yes, the rich are indeed already separated from the working class and there is no "librul" to blame for that, but greed, simply.

Who can drive 8 cars at the same time?

 

They're all the same and wouldn't be there if they weren't. They are hand picked by the elitists when they are in they.re 20's and the 1% of the 1%ers doesn't care if they are republicans or democrats.
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014/07/07/Dems-Court-Big-Business-Over-Corporate-Welfare

 

Your position would be correct except for the reality that money has a major role in political influence and political influence can and does influence tax law and the way money raised from taxes is spent. If the playing field was actually equal for all then resulting wealth disparity would be truly a result of individual effort which would be an ideal result.

 

If you were wealthy you would do the same with your money. If I were wealthy I might own a dozen cars. So what!!!

 

There are larger issues here other than the base human emotions of envy and jealousy. It's a worthy discussion and the reality is 180* from the OP's assertion. The widening gap is due to progressive tax and regulation policies that have stifled employment growth and absolutely killed small business.

Here in Vermont, as in most other states, the regulating bodies have intruded on almost every aspect of business operation through excessive and needless regulation. Further, the anti-growthers and environmentalists have found that they can use permitting, zoning, local building codes, local ordnance and State concurrence requirements to shut down all business growth both new, existing expansion and existing structure maintenance.

Case in point. Here in central Vermont a company, Metro Mail, received a new contract to send statements out for an east coast bank. The additional work was going to require 25 new employees bringing the total work force for Metro Mail to just over 360. The new printing and envelope stuffing machines required that an addition to the existing factory of about 5,000 sq.ft. This addition required and act 250 permit. This process involves multiple public hearings, design and plan submissions and more public hearings with each change or iteration of the plan as it goes through committee. The process takes years. YEARS!

Metro Mail couldn't wait, they had the contract that they needed to fill. While the State powers that be and the local Democrat city fathers said "they won't leave", they did. They moved the entire operation out of state, a loss of 360 jobs.

Add to this the very same story for Omya, a company the quarries making limestone slurry, the stuff that's in your toothpaste, sand paper, paint and anything else that needs grit. Omya's headquarters was in Central Vermont, it damn near constituted an entire village, Proctor, VT. The anti business climate, excess regulation and onerous and continuous permitting process drove the company to move it's North American headquarters out of Vermont. Hundreds of corporate headquarters jobs that paid $80,000 a year and above that had been in Vermont for over half a century, gone.

http://www.vce.org/understandingomya.html

Add now GE's scale back and IBM's reduction of over a 1,000 high paying along with the 1,000's of small businesses that have withdrawn from the Vermont market and it's easy to see why we have an income disparity that is growing faster than other states.

Thanks progressives.

Cheers
Labour

 

Gonna get wider too if the warmongers get their way.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/obamas-isis-war-profit-for-military-contractors/5400451

 

Did you know we could solve simple poverty with existing legal and physical infrastructure in our republic on an at-will basis?

 

The problem is about those responsible for themselves vs those that are not.

When I first became interested in politics I didn't even factor in social issues. I was just exiting college and everything was about numbers and finance to me.

Actually my beliefs were so "black and white" that I found myself agreeing with draconian ideals, hence the name Draco.

As I grew and studied history, I found that unless you plan on simply killing off those whom are less responsible, you MUST be responsible for them. If not you end up with a French Revolution of type. I personally do not want my acquired wealth to make me a candidate for a National Razor. With our Americanized verbiage it would probably be called a Freedom Razor, or a Liberty Razor. Whatever it will be called, I like my head where it currently is thank you.

Now I know you leftists are frothing at the mouth saying "people aren't poor because they are irresponsible!"

There are some people who are unlucky, but the majority out there who are poor are there because of their life decisions, period.

 

shows you don't have a clue in what wealth is
wealth is anything that has value which includes labor, ingenuity, inventiveness, thought, creativity, and ideas and all that is infinite

 

Does it matter since capitalism has no solutions for free and must be bailed out by socialism, like usual.

A social safety is just that.

 

Whatever can you mean? There is no upper limit to the stock market.

 

It's also been valid since the beginning of time. The first step in the process is to make available for election only those people independently wealthy enough to run for office and shower them with all the additional cash they need to win. Most of the time it is easy and inexpensive because both candidates are independently wealthy. A few token middle-classers are usually thrown in to mollify the public voting stooges.

Because Mr. Smith has tilted the board through generations of favorable legislation and generous tax benefits. Hell, Mr. Smith's passive dollars are even taxed at lower rates than your active dollars. And Mr. Smith's progeny never have to worry about earning an active dollar no matter how big of a non-meritorious dolt he is.

I hope that answers a few of your questions about why people are concerned about the ever-increasing income gap.

 

I don't believe in blaming capitalists for concentrating wealth, engendering Monopolies and the anti-trust issues so endemic to them. It is only when they claim to be doing it in the name of the socialism of the "game of life" that it becomes an issue of contention. The left already knows we need socialism to bail out capitalism, like usual.

 

Explain please.

Cheers
Labour