APP - Rich And Poor Jobs And Wages

midcan5 said:
I was going to leave that line out of the reply as I assumed you would say the same thing over again - and you did. Leave the line out as it isn't necessary to my argument, the figures may not be static over long periods but they are static for given periods. We live in the now last I checked. If I am hungry, without a job, living near poverty, time travel is not a feasible solution.
Click to expand...

Time travel isn't, but obtaining food on a temporary basis can be done by using a credit card, or charity.

That leaves the other issues which you had no argument for so ignored:

2. Land is limited but wealth production is not connected to it. Even farmers grow more crops per acre now then they did 30 years ago, and real estate becomes denser with single family homes to cluster developments to town homes to high rise buildings. And those are only two minor sectors of the economy.
3. What resources are limited? Very few are, and those have little to no impact on wealth production.
4. With regards to your argument specifically, the company would simply expand to create more wealth.
 
Damn Yankee said:
Time travel isn't, but obtaining food on a temporary basis can be done by using a credit card, or charity.
Click to expand...

You are not giving answers that fit the reality. The statistics and the world as it is, for a very long time, deny a sort of dreamy market equality that all is well so long as we believe all is well. Poverty is real.


"Most of the debate in the U.S. is clouded by vested interests and by ideology. Yet there is by now a rich empirical record to judge these issues scientifically. The evidence may be found by comparing a group of relatively free-market economies that have low to moderate rates of taxation and social outlays with a group of social-welfare states that have high rates of taxation and social outlays." http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=the-social-welfare-state
 
midcan5 said:
You are not giving answers that fit the reality. The statistics and the world as it is, for a very long time, deny a sort of dreamy market equality that all is well so long as we believe all is well. Poverty is real.
Click to expand...
Actually it is you who are not fitting reality. Poor folk in the US have apartments and TV. So I ask you again to answer this simple question in your own words:

The amount of money present in the US today is much larger than it was 30 years ago. How can that be if wealth is limited?
 
midcan5 said:
"There is no need to sally forth, for it remains true that those things which make us human are, curiously enough, always close at hand. Resolve, then, that on this very ground, with small flags waving and tiny blasts of tiny trumpets, we shall meet the enemy, and not only may he be ours, he may be us." Pogo



According to a recent Harper's Index 10,149 US companies are now foreign owned. The average net worth of a white woman between 36 and 49 is 42,600 dollars. For a non-white woman it is five dollars. The CEO of Nike, Philip Knight is the sixth richest man in America. He is worth five billion dollars. "By 1992, Nike had eliminated nearly all of their U.S. work force in favor of low-wage Asian producers."

'As of 2004, the richest one percent of Americans possessed sixty percent of all wealth in the country, while the bottom forty percent accounted for a whopping two-tenths of a percent.' 791 American companies listed in URL below outsource their work to foreign countries. The few companies I am familiar with have well over 5000 employees in India. Added together, how many jobs do you think this list comprises? 'There are 2.4 million job openings for 15.3 million unemployed Americans.'

'The 400 American families with the highest incomes have seen a dramatic decline in their effective tax rate since 1992.' '80 percent of Americans 65 years and older depend on Social Security for half of their income.'

'The rich countries' subsidies to their richest farmers were $300 billion in 2005. Their tariffs on manufactured imports from poor countries are four times higher than on those from other rich countries. In 2005, just $7.63 billion of the total $106.78 billion of aid went to basic social services - 0.02 per cent of the rich countries' combined GNP.' (Book below)

'In 2004, 2.5 billion people, 40 per cent of humanity, were living in severe poverty. Every year, 18 million people, a third of all who die, die early from poverty-related causes.'

The SCOTUS recently gave free speech rights to a corporation, do you think their next step will be to give free speech rights to foreigners as they own and operate much of America? Maybe Toyota's executives could inform Roberts, Scalia, Thomas, and Alito on their corporate needs making sure laws are in-line with profits.

Republicans fought tooth and nail against Clinton's raising of the minimum wage, and Reagan was content to keep minimum wage stagnant during his presidency. Republicans just voted down extending benefits for the unemployed, and BP has a real hero in Republican Barton. FDR started minimum wage at 25 cents.

Republican congresses have opposed every change since social security to medicare, and today continues to say 'no' to anything that helps the nation and its working people. One has to give their propaganda machine great credit, for they do nothing but make it appear all things done by the opposition are bad or will lead straight to hell.

The Disclose Act is 'designed to increase transparency for corporations and other interest groups who make contributions to political campaigns. The bill passed 219 to 206 with only two Republicans voting in favor of the measure.'

'...if we completely repealed the estate tax, it would provide an estimated $32 billion tax break for the Walton family — the founders of Wal-Mart. So, let me make a contrast here with regard to Republican philosophy. They believe that it is a good idea to give a $32.7 billion tax break to one family worth $86 billion, but when it comes to providing $35 billion for an emergency extension of unemployment benefits to some 2 million Americans who lost their jobs through no fault of their own, the Republicans are just not there. One family gets almost $33 billion in tax breaks, 2 million working class Americans get nothing.' Bernie Sanders

It seems the truth is simple and obvious as the old cartoon Pogo demonstrates. Or is it just profit motivation regardless of the consequences. If money is the primary admired goal then the new American icon should be an overpaid sports figure (pick one), and/or Bernie Madoff or the many other investment millionaires who really do nothing, followed by televangelists such as the Crouches or Osteens, they at least make some people happy with the promise their reward follows this vale of tears.

'Don't Tread On Me' needs to be revised to include a fat-cat, smoking a cigar, wallowing in money on the French Rivera. That will at least get our new American values in line with reality.

And someone needs to revise 'Proverbs' as all this talk of helping the poor went out the window with the massive cathedrals that make Babel look like a shack. "Speak up for those who cannot speak for themselves, for the rights of all who run large businesses. Speak up and judge fairly; defend the rights of the wealthy and the corporations." Proverbs 31:8-9 [American Revised Edition]


Bibliography

http://harpers.org/subjects/Indexes

http://www.epi.org/economic_snapsho...op_earners_growing_incomes_falling_tax_rates/
http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Boycotts/NikeThird_facts.html
http://uspoverty.change.org/blog/view/want_to_be_poor_work_one_of_these_8_jobs
http://www.cnn.com/CNN/Programs/lou.dobbs.tonight/popups/exporting.america/content.html
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2009/03/03/us/20090303_LEONHARDT.html?ref=economy
http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Wolves/greedy.htm
http://financemymoney.com/who-contr...f-stocks-housing-debt-eating-personal-income/
http://financemymoney.com/2-4-milli...rth-is-stored-in-housing-but-not-for-the-top/
http://financemymoney.com/the-5-per...ess-profits-and-all-of-it-was-a-ponzi-scheme/
http://debtreductionus.com/health/?p=97420
http://www.salon.com/news/karl_rove...room/2010/07/23/rove_group_billionaire_donors
Amazon.com: World Poverty and Human Rights (9780745641447): Thomas…



"Ultimately, the ideal society is one in which, if taxes are necessary, everyone pays them as freely and cheerfully as they pay their dues to some club of which they are devoted members – where citizen and state can trust each other perfectly." Emrys Westacott
Click to expand...


Good post midcan.

In the Muslim world there is little hope for a good job or a happy future for hoards of young men. There is a deepening economic, social, political, and cultural crisis in the Muslim World. So the promise of the afterlife and 70 virgins waiting in a promised land is a recruiting tool for becoming a 'jihadist'.

It is ironic how similar that conservative culture is to the conservatives in our culture.

The ideas and policies of the right in this country invites the fate of Robert Frost's hired man, the fate of having "nothing to look backward to with pride, and nothing to look forward to with hope."

I look forward to a great future for America, a future in which our country will match its military strength with our moral restraint, its wealth with our wisdom, its power with our purpose. I look forward to an America which will not be afraid of grace and beauty, which will protect the beauty of our natural environment, which will preserve the great old American houses and squares and parks of our national past, and which will build handsome and balanced cities for our future.

I look forward to an America which will reward achievement in the arts as we reward achievement in business or statecraft. I look forward to an America which will steadily raise the standards of artistic accomplishment and which will steadily enlarge cultural opportunities for all of our citizens. And I look forward to an America which commands respect throughout the world not only for its strength but for its civilization as well.

And I look forward to a world which will be safe not only for democracy and diversity but also for personal distinction.

President John F. Kennedy
Remarks at Amherst College
October 26, 1963
 
Damn Yankee said:
The amount of money present in the US today is much larger than it was 30 years ago. How can that be if wealth is limited?
Click to expand...

You should be able to answer that question yourself? Post #3 in this thread spells it out clearly as well. Increased money doesn't mean increased fairness as any third world nation you care to pick demonstrates. Also inflation and increased military spending diminish the money supply. Consider only the billions Bush wasted on Iraq, or the increased costs of energy.
 
midcan5 said:
You should be able to answer that question yourself? Post #3 in this thread spells it out clearly as well. Increased money doesn't mean increased fairness as any third world nation you care to pick demonstrates. Also inflation and increased military spending diminish the money supply. Consider only the billions Bush wasted on Iraq, or the increased costs of energy.
Click to expand...

But again, I want you to answer it in your own words, thus expose you for the economic retard that you are. Fairness is not the issue; limited wealth is. You said that wealth is obviously limited so explain why. :)
 
Damn Yankee said:
But again, I want you to answer it in your own words, thus expose you for the economic retard that you are. Fairness is not the issue; limited wealth is. You said that wealth is obviously limited so explain why. :)
Click to expand...

Huh! I just did, inflation and diminished returns demonstrate that clearly? You were alive in 2008 when republican policies reduced wealth and value to the point of economic collapse. For many then it meant back to work or decreased life possibilities. Many will never recover.

But I see your argument now, it isn't a realistic one, it is just an effort to say increase is possible because it usually happens. They used to say that about swans too? You lost this debate long ago, but you persist in the belief that wealth always grows. Recent history disproves that. Oh, and if you still believe, email me as I have a stupendous investment for you, you won't lose, just believe. ;)
 
midcan5 said:
Huh! I just did, inflation and diminished returns demonstrate that clearly? You were alive in 2008 when republican policies reduced wealth and value to the point of economic collapse. For many then it meant back to work or decreased life possibilities. Many will never recover.

But I see your argument now, it isn't a realistic one, it is just an effort to say increase is possible because it usually happens. They used to say that about swans too? You lost this debate long ago, but you persist in the belief that wealth always grows. Recent history disproves that. Oh, and if you still believe, email me as I have a stupendous investment for you, you won't lose, just believe. ;)
Click to expand...
You're again trying to avoid the question, this time with an obvious straw man. But I'm arguing against your position that wealth is limited. I never said that wealth always grows. You're also trying to the "ALgore" tactic, which is to declare that you've already won the argument.

So for, what, the 6th time? You said that wealth is obviously limited so explain why.
 
Damn Yankee said:
You're again trying to avoid the question, this time with an obvious straw man. But I'm arguing against your position that wealth is limited. I never said that wealth always grows. You're also trying to the "ALgore" tactic, which is to declare that you've already won the argument.

So for, what, the 6th time? You said that wealth is obviously limited so explain why.
Click to expand...

Sorry the answer doesn't fit whatever idea you have about unlimited wealth. Even if we were to assume wealth unlimited, what would that really mean. Can we say that in the 30's, the 50's, or anytime wealth is unlimited? We can, you do, but it means nothing. The idea has no relevant value. Or asked differently was wealth limited in the 1890's or the 1930's if it wasn't then all those people who lost their life saving weren't looking in the right place I guess. I have answered several times. So tell me a time when wealth wasn't limited? It has always been limited, resources real or agreed upon are always limited. That's just the way it is. Maybe the universe is unlimited but even that is doubtful.
 
hotdog said:
America can't go to war with China. The war in Iraq was expensive enough. China has the worlds largest army and a lot of nuclear weapons. They also have a large navy and air force. They have a massive industrial capability that could easily be converted over to weapons manufacturing. China has a population of 1.3 Billion. America went to war with China in 1950 and that ended in a stalemate. China is far more powerful now then they were during the korean war.
Click to expand...

It should be noted that the US never planned to go to war with China in 1950. We neither expected them to enter the war, nor did we expect them to attack us prior to our arriving at the Yalu River. Furthermore, as evidenced by Truman's argument with MacArthur, we never wanted to go to war with China, and so chose not to retaliate against the million man army that had assembled.
 
midcan5 said:
Sorry the answer doesn't fit whatever idea you have about unlimited wealth. Even if we were to assume wealth unlimited, what would that really mean. Can we say that in the 30's, the 50's, or anytime wealth is unlimited? We can, you do, but it means nothing. The idea has no relevant value. Or asked differently was wealth limited in the 1890's or the 1930's if it wasn't then all those people who lost their life saving weren't looking in the right place I guess. I have answered several times. So tell me a time when wealth wasn't limited? It has always been limited, resources real or agreed upon are always limited. That's just the way it is. Maybe the universe is unlimited but even that is doubtful.
Click to expand...

Since you are unable to explain how wealth is limited, then answer this: What resources that contribute to wealth production are limited?
 
Damn Yankee said:
Since you are unable to explain how wealth is limited, then answer this: What resources that contribute to wealth production are limited?
Click to expand...

This is not a honest debate as you often no substantive proof of the infinite wealth you presume to believe in, but let me repeat, all resources are limited, it is in the nature of material goods or reality. Name a resource that is not limited.


"It is just this lack of connection to a concern with truth - this indifference to how things really are - that I regard as of the essence of bullshit." Harry Frankfurt
 
midcan5 said:
This is not a honest debate as you often no substantive proof of the infinite wealth you presume to believe in, but let me repeat, all resources are limited, it is in the nature of material goods or reality. Name a resource that is not limited.
Click to expand...

Energy, for one. There's more recoverable petroleum in the ground now than there was in 1970, and in one hour the sun radiates more energy to the earth than man kind uses in a year. So how is energy limited?
 
Damn Yankee said:
Energy, for one. There's more recoverable petroleum in the ground now than there was in 1970, and in one hour the sun radiates more energy to the earth than man kind uses in a year. So how is energy limited?
Click to expand...

So you admit carbon petroleum is limited - we are making progress. The sun is an interesting resource creator but uncontrollable. You have noticed night and short days I hope? Clouds too? Properly harnessed the sun offers some help but it too is limited based on how much energy could be stored. Next.

Back on topic.

"Disagreements about the optimal level of wealth inequality underlie policy debates ranging from taxation to welfare. We attempt to insert the desires of “regular” Americans into these debates, by asking a nationally representative online panel to estimate the current distribution of wealth in the United States and to “build a better America” by constructing distributions with their ideal level of inequality. First, respondents dramatically underestimated the current level of wealth inequality. Second, respondents constructed ideal wealth distributions that were far more equitable than even their erroneously low estimates of the actual distribution."

http://www.people.hbs.edu/mnorton/norton ariely in press.pdf
 
Last edited:
'Income Inequality: Too Big to Ignore'

"During the three decades after World War II, for example, incomes in the United States rose rapidly and at about the same rate — almost 3 percent a year — for people at all income levels. America had an economically vibrant middle class. Roads and bridges were well maintained, and impressive new infrastructure was being built. People were optimistic.

By contrast, during the last three decades the economy has grown much more slowly, and our infrastructure has fallen into grave disrepair. Most troubling, all significant income growth has been concentrated at the top of the scale. The share of total income going to the top 1 percent of earners, which stood at 8.9 percent in 1976, rose to 23.5 percent by 2007, but during the same period, the average inflation-adjusted hourly wage declined by more than 7 percent."

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/17/business/17view.html?src=me&ref=general

'Scrutinizing the Elite, Whether They Like It or Not'

“When we study the poor, it’s relatively easy,” said Sudhir Venkatesh, a professor of sociology at Columbia and the author of “Gang Leader for a Day” (Penguin Press, 2008). “The poor don’t have the power to say no. Elites don’t grant us interviews. They don’t let us hang out at their country clubs.”


http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/16/your-money/16wealth.html?src=me&ref=business


“You have to come in accepting that there will always be poor people in society and there will always be wealthy people in society, and neither of the two reached that status by their own efforts.”

That’s not the usual description of this issue. But otherwise, you risk viewing the rich as rapacious thieves or seeing the poor as lazy freeloaders.

That said, there were other academics who hewed to an older model of power dynamics. Jeffrey Winters, associate professor of political science at Northwestern University, talked of the wealthy in America in terms of oligarchy. And he advanced an argument against what he called the “income defense industry.” from above link
 
midcan5 said:
So you admit carbon petroleum is limited - we are making progress. The sun is an interesting resource creator but uncontrollable. You have noticed night and short days I hope? Clouds too? Properly harnessed the sun offers some help but it too is limited based on how much energy could be stored. Next.
Click to expand...
Actually, I have proved that there is more energy available then man could possibly use; not a limiting resource. So what is the next resource that you think is limited?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top