It is currently Mon Nov 25, 2024 4:56 pm

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 369 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Thu Sep 04, 2014 7:26 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 02, 2011 4:29 pm
Posts: 40650
Location: Everywhere
pizza_Place: giordanos
Scorehead shit there are foreign car/motorcycle companies and Harley making shit in this country as we spew crap. Go where they are. You may not love Nebraska now but at $18/hr at that COL you will learn to.

_________________
Elections have consequences.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 04, 2014 7:27 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 02, 2011 4:29 pm
Posts: 40650
Location: Everywhere
pizza_Place: giordanos
Nas wrote:
pittmike wrote:
I realize the middle is disappearing and that is a huge/main issue. My top and bottom was simply to try to illustrate that no matter what the system the will be rich and not so. You can give the poor $1M today each and it will just make the top 10% zillionaires rather than billionaires.


Right now the top 1% pockets $3.8 trillion and the top 10% pockets $8.7 trillion. Leaving the other 90% to fight over $8.3 trillion. If the top 10% just took 40% instead of 51% that would give the the forgotten 90% another $2 trillion to split up. If they took it back to the level it was the year I was born (1982) it would give the forgotten 90% $3.3 trillion dollars more to split up. I believe 1982 was right as usual.



Nas, once again I already said you made a good point. But no one wants to answer how to fix.

_________________
Elections have consequences.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 04, 2014 7:28 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 24, 2010 10:16 am
Posts: 20082
pizza_Place: Aurelios
pittmike wrote:
Nas wrote:
pittmike wrote:
I realize the middle is disappearing and that is a huge/main issue. My top and bottom was simply to try to illustrate that no matter what the system the will be rich and not so. You can give the poor $1M today each and it will just make the top 10% zillionaires rather than billionaires.


Right now the top 1% pockets $3.8 trillion and the top 10% pockets $8.7 trillion. Leaving the other 90% to fight over $8.3 trillion. If the top 10% just took 40% instead of 51% that would give the the forgotten 90% another $2 trillion to split up. If they took it back to the level it was the year I was born (1982) it would give the forgotten 90% $3.3 trillion dollars more to split up. I believe 1982 was right as usual.



Nas, once again I already said you made a good point. But no one wants to answer how to fix.

I don't think anyone knows how. And that's damn scary.

_________________
drinky wrote:
If you hate Laurence, then don't listen - don't comment. When he co-hosts the B&B show, take that day off ... listen to an old podcast of a Bernstein solo show and jerk off all day.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 04, 2014 7:29 pm 
Offline
100000 CLUB
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 8:06 pm
Posts: 81466
pizza_Place: 773-684-2222
pittmike wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
Btw we raised minimum wage from 5.15 to 7.25 from 2007-2009 (about 40%) and prices stayed reasonable

And these same 50$ big mac arguments were made. What happened there?




Good point there. On the other hand did it help society to close a wage gap or improve things? I will wait for a graph. :wink:

No. Guess what happened? The gap widened

_________________
Be well

GO BEARS!!!


Last edited by Nas on Thu Sep 04, 2014 7:31 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 04, 2014 7:29 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 12:16 pm
Posts: 81625
pittmike wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
Btw we raised minimum wage from 5.15 to 7.25 from 2007-2009 (about 40%) and prices stayed reasonable

And these same 50$ big mac arguments were made. What happened there?



Good point there. On the other hand did it help society to close a wage gap or improve things? I will wait for a graph. :wink:

No, you're right it cuts both ways. That raise didn't solve much

Although one could argue that was only the beginning of setting things right


But t should put the prices will skyrocket argument to rest I think


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 04, 2014 7:30 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 12:16 pm
Posts: 81625
Hank Scorpio wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
Btw we raised minimum wage from 5.15 to 7.25 from 2007-2009 (about 40%) and prices stayed reasonable

And these same 50$ big mac arguments were made. What happened there?

Did the raise help anyone? Doesn't seem like it.

Definitely not what was hoped


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 04, 2014 7:32 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 02, 2011 4:29 pm
Posts: 40650
Location: Everywhere
pizza_Place: giordanos
Another thing many do not know is that none of us is keeping up with real inflation. Even if you make a great living or have a real solid job you are losing. We have all been there the last 10 years. No raise this year then 2.5% the next then none for two then maybe a 5%. You are losing and the CPI they all gear raises to now is BS.

Unless you are unique or skilled enough to job hop every now and then you lose.

_________________
Elections have consequences.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 04, 2014 7:32 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 02, 2011 4:29 pm
Posts: 40650
Location: Everywhere
pizza_Place: giordanos
Nas wrote:
pittmike wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
Btw we raised minimum wage from 5.15 to 7.25 from 2007-2009 (about 40%) and prices stayed reasonable

And these same 50$ big mac arguments were made. What happened there?




Good point there. On the other hand did it help society to close a wage gap or improve things? I will wait for a graph. :wink:

No. Guess what happened? The gap widened


Exactly

_________________
Elections have consequences.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 04, 2014 7:33 pm 
Nas wrote:
pittmike wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
Btw we raised minimum wage from 5.15 to 7.25 from 2007-2009 (about 40%) and prices stayed reasonable

And these same 50$ big mac arguments were made. What happened there?




Good point there. On the other hand did it help society to close a wage gap or improve things? I will wait for a graph. :wink:

No. Guess what happened? The gap widened

Ben Stein wrote:
Did it work? Anyone? Anyone?


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 04, 2014 7:33 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 12:16 pm
Posts: 81625
Nas wrote:
No. Guess what happened? The gap widened.

It kept widening. The raise didn't contribute to the gap.


Its like saying you dumped a bucket of water on a house fire but it continued to burn


I might suggest more water was needed


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 04, 2014 7:33 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2005 6:45 pm
Posts: 38357
Location: Lovetron
pizza_Place: Malnati's
Nas wrote:
pittmike wrote:
I realize the middle is disappearing and that is a huge/main issue. My top and bottom was simply to try to illustrate that no matter what the system the will be rich and not so. You can give the poor $1M today each and it will just make the top 10% zillionaires rather than billionaires.


Right now the top 1% pockets $3.8 trillion and the top 10% pockets $8.7 trillion. Leaving the other 90% to fight over $8.3 trillion. If the top 10% just took 40% instead of 51% that would give the the forgotten 90% another $2 trillion to split up. If they took it back to the level it was the year I was born (1982) it would give the forgotten 90% $3.3 trillion dollars more to split up. I believe 1982 was right as usual.


How much does the top 10% give to charity and philanthropic endeavors?

_________________
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
The victims are the American People and the Republic itself.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 04, 2014 7:34 pm 
Offline
100000 CLUB
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 8:06 pm
Posts: 81466
pizza_Place: 773-684-2222
Seacrest wrote:
I wonder how many people in this thread even know what companies their 401K money is invested in.


Companies that support terrorists.

_________________
Be well

GO BEARS!!!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 04, 2014 7:34 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 02, 2011 4:29 pm
Posts: 40650
Location: Everywhere
pizza_Place: giordanos
rogers park bryan wrote:
pittmike wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
Btw we raised minimum wage from 5.15 to 7.25 from 2007-2009 (about 40%) and prices stayed reasonable

And these same 50$ big mac arguments were made. What happened there?



Good point there. On the other hand did it help society to close a wage gap or improve things? I will wait for a graph. :wink:

No, you're right it cuts both ways. That raise didn't solve much

Although one could argue that was only the beginning of setting things right


But t should put the prices will skyrocket argument to rest I think



We already agreed the last go around at this. Raise it over time to $15 I do not care. Just deal with the problems SHOULD they arise from it.

_________________
Elections have consequences.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 04, 2014 7:34 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 12:16 pm
Posts: 81625
pittmike wrote:
Nas wrote:
pittmike wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
Btw we raised minimum wage from 5.15 to 7.25 from 2007-2009 (about 40%) and prices stayed reasonable

And these same 50$ big mac arguments were made. What happened there?




Good point there. On the other hand did it help society to close a wage gap or improve things? I will wait for a graph. :wink:

No. Guess what happened? The gap widened


Exactly

You believe the rate hike contributed to the gap?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 04, 2014 7:36 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 12:16 pm
Posts: 81625
Seacrest wrote:
I wonder how many people in this thread even know what companies their 401K money is invested in.

Probably like half.

What's the connection to this thread though? I'm just curious what makes you think of that


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 04, 2014 7:37 pm 
Offline
100000 CLUB
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 8:06 pm
Posts: 81466
pizza_Place: 773-684-2222
Seacrest wrote:
Nas wrote:
pittmike wrote:
I realize the middle is disappearing and that is a huge/main issue. My top and bottom was simply to try to illustrate that no matter what the system the will be rich and not so. You can give the poor $1M today each and it will just make the top 10% zillionaires rather than billionaires.


Right now the top 1% pockets $3.8 trillion and the top 10% pockets $8.7 trillion. Leaving the other 90% to fight over $8.3 trillion. If the top 10% just took 40% instead of 51% that would give the the forgotten 90% another $2 trillion to split up. If they took it back to the level it was the year I was born (1982) it would give the forgotten 90% $3.3 trillion dollars more to split up. I believe 1982 was right as usual.


How much does the top 10% give to charity and philanthropic endeavors?


I'm guessing that it isn't $3.2T annually. I'm guessing the bottom 90's would love if the pie were split up like it was in 1982. I don't believe anyone is calling the top 10% or 1% monsters.

_________________
Be well

GO BEARS!!!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 04, 2014 7:38 pm 
Offline
100000 CLUB
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 8:06 pm
Posts: 81466
pizza_Place: 773-684-2222
RPB the point was increasing the minimum wage does not decrease the income inequality.

_________________
Be well

GO BEARS!!!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 04, 2014 7:39 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 12:16 pm
Posts: 81625
Nas wrote:
RPB the point was increasing the minimum wage does not decrease the income inequality.

Fair enough, I already conceded that point.

But it came across like you were blaming the increase for the widening


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 04, 2014 7:42 pm 
Offline
100000 CLUB
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 8:06 pm
Posts: 81466
pizza_Place: 773-684-2222
If the minimum wage was increased to $100 an hour and the top 10% took 51% of the pie and the bottom 90% got 49% we would still have the same problem we have today. That's why the number doesn't matter. How the pie is divided is what matters.

_________________
Be well

GO BEARS!!!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 04, 2014 7:44 pm 
Offline
100000 CLUB
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 8:06 pm
Posts: 81466
pizza_Place: 773-684-2222
rogers park bryan wrote:
Nas wrote:
RPB the point was increasing the minimum wage does not decrease the income inequality.

Fair enough, I already conceded that point.

But it came across like you were blaming the increase for the widening


Not at all.

_________________
Be well

GO BEARS!!!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 04, 2014 7:47 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 12:16 pm
Posts: 81625
Nas wrote:
If the minimum wage was increased to $100 an hour and the top 10% took 51% of the pie and the bottom 90% got 49% we would still have the same problem we have today. That's why the number doesn't matter. How the pie is divided is what matters.

Raising the minimum would force them to give up some pie imo


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 04, 2014 7:51 pm 
Offline
100000 CLUB
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 8:06 pm
Posts: 81466
pizza_Place: 773-684-2222
rogers park bryan wrote:
Nas wrote:
If the minimum wage was increased to $100 an hour and the top 10% took 51% of the pie and the bottom 90% got 49% we would still have the same problem we have today. That's why the number doesn't matter. How the pie is divided is what matters.

Raising the minimum would force them to give up some pie imo


We saw a 40% increase and an economic collapse made them take more. It's literally at an all-time high.

_________________
Be well

GO BEARS!!!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 04, 2014 7:56 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 24, 2010 10:16 am
Posts: 20082
pizza_Place: Aurelios
rogers park bryan wrote:
Nas wrote:
If the minimum wage was increased to $100 an hour and the top 10% took 51% of the pie and the bottom 90% got 49% we would still have the same problem we have today. That's why the number doesn't matter. How the pie is divided is what matters.

Raising the minimum would force them to give up some pie imo

And that is where we fundamentally disagree. I think that is the goal but that it will just be the same as always.

_________________
drinky wrote:
If you hate Laurence, then don't listen - don't comment. When he co-hosts the B&B show, take that day off ... listen to an old podcast of a Bernstein solo show and jerk off all day.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 04, 2014 8:04 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jun 22, 2006 6:46 pm
Posts: 33815
pizza_Place: Gioacchino's
Whose pie and how much of their pie is the rest of the world entitled to?

Your top 10% earners that "have" half this money pay about 70% of taxes, I think.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 04, 2014 8:05 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 12:16 pm
Posts: 81625
Nas wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
Nas wrote:
If the minimum wage was increased to $100 an hour and the top 10% took 51% of the pie and the bottom 90% got 49% we would still have the same problem we have today. That's why the number doesn't matter. How the pie is divided is what matters.

Raising the minimum would force them to give up some pie imo


We saw a 40% increase and an economic collapse made them take more. It's literally at an all-time high.

But we still weren't up to cost of living level. We needed a full measure and we went half


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 04, 2014 8:07 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 12:16 pm
Posts: 81625
Spaulding wrote:
Whose pie and how much of their pie is the rest of the world entitled to?

Your top 10% earners that "have" half this money pay about 70% of taxes, I think.

That's a long argument but I think most would agree you don't want the income gap to be that wide regardless right?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 04, 2014 8:10 pm 
Offline
100000 CLUB
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 8:06 pm
Posts: 81466
pizza_Place: 773-684-2222
rogers park bryan wrote:
Spaulding wrote:
Whose pie and how much of their pie is the rest of the world entitled to?

Your top 10% earners that "have" half this money pay about 70% of taxes, I think.

That's a long argument but I think most would agree you don't want the income gap to be that wide regardless right?


I think the bottom 90% would love to make more money even if it meant they paid more in taxes.

_________________
Be well

GO BEARS!!!


Last edited by Nas on Thu Sep 04, 2014 8:12 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 04, 2014 8:11 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2011 7:56 am
Posts: 32234
Location: A sterile, homogeneous suburb
pizza_Place: Pizza Cucina
rogers park bryan wrote:
Spaulding wrote:
Whose pie and how much of their pie is the rest of the world entitled to?

Your top 10% earners that "have" half this money pay about 70% of taxes, I think.

That's a long argument but I think most would agree you don't want the income gap to be that wide regardless right?


One would think.

_________________
Curious Hair wrote:
I'm a big dumb shitlib baby


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 04, 2014 8:18 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jun 22, 2006 6:46 pm
Posts: 33815
pizza_Place: Gioacchino's
rogers park bryan wrote:
That's a long argument but I think most would agree you don't want the income gap to be that wide regardless right?


That's the argument you want to have. You want to take somebody's pie and give it to other people. That's what it comes down to is #s if you want to do that. You will also be having a negative effect on "professionals", small business owners and companies, and "inventors". Otherwise it's the system/education/tracks etc that needs to be changed. I'm of the opinion that giving the gov. money to solve a problem doesn't work. There is too much waste already.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 04, 2014 8:20 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jun 22, 2006 6:46 pm
Posts: 33815
pizza_Place: Gioacchino's
Nas wrote:

I think the bottom 90% would love to make more money even if it meant they paid more in taxes.


So does that 10% and you are giving them no incentive to do so.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 369 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 21 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group