When will Republicans learn the rich have gotten richer at their expense since Reagan

C

Craig234

Verified User
Simple chart:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipe...1percentUSA.png/300px-2008_Top1percentUSA.png

What it shows is that FDR started an improvement in the country, since when inequality was too high, reducing it by taxing the biggest incomes more.

As a result, the share of income going to the top 1% shrunk from nearly 25% to under 10% just before Reagan.

And that was great for the American people. That's when the middle class exploded - and we had all kinds of progress and businesses growing.

Were the rich horribly off, mistreated, with only 10% of the income? No, we still had rich people, we still had Wall Street, we still had CEO's, we still had mansions.

But it was a lot better for most Americans at sharing in the prosperity. People could buy a home and make a living for their family on one normal income.

Republicans, ask yourselves a question. What is the best share of income for the top 1%?

I'll wait a moment. OK, you didn't answer, just sputtering about some ideology that we shouldn't care or something.

But as their share goes up - 5%, to 10%, to 15%, 20%, to 25% - by definition, that's all money from your (the American people's) pockets. That's your wages NOT going up. That's every dollar of real growth being taken by the top few.

And what do we have to show for the decades of the chart above of the rich taking so much more?

The answer is, nothing for the American people.

Not that much changed. No explosion of better companies with better products more than before. No benefits. Just the same type of companies, the same types of CEOs, but being paid far more. Their wages going from 25 times the average worker to up to 400 times the average worker. And guess where all that increase came from? Yes, by definition, the rest of society, the workers. The company made a lot more money, and it all went to the top. No trickle down in decades.

So what have you learned about having the rich skyrocket in wealth at the expense of the rest of society? You have learned that no, the rich getting a lot richer doesn't create some massive increase in higher growth. Not only was growth higher with the rich taking a smaller share, but then that higher growth was shared - now it's not. You have learned there is no 'trickle down'.

You have learned that the only thing the rich getting richer does is make the rich richer, at the expense of everyone else, that it LOWERS growth by diverting wealth away from the economy to be used and simply bids up the prices of companies and stocks instead of being in the hands of people to start companies or buy products. And don't forget to include our going from under $1 trillion in debt to over $20 trillion, because every dollar of the tax cuts for the rich since Reagan is added to debt.

That's the dirty little secret behind the policy, that makes the tax cuts for the rich seem like less problem than they are, because the American people aren't paying for them all now - they're just adding them to our debt. And the American people
are increasing their own debt to make up for all the lost share of income.

Look at this chart, the growth of debt before and after Reagan:

http://static6.businessinsider.com/...00-/screen shot 2013-04-09 at 11.27.03 am.jpg

And for that matter, look at how our debt is increasing to others - how before Reagan, non-Americans owned a steady under 5% of our debt, but since Reagan it's increased to nearly 20%:

http://static3.businessinsider.com/...526/screen shot 2013-04-09 at 11.29.04 am.jpg

Republicans need to learn that the reduction of the taxes on the rich has been a scam with a heavy price for the American people, doing nothing but making the rich richer.

It's estimated that wages are about a third lower than they wold have been under the tax rates before Reagan. That's handing over trillions to the rich. It hurts growth and it's given our country a huge amount owed. And the interest on that debt is taken out of the American people's pockets - and future Americans' pockets.

There is no better economic policy we could do right now than raising taxes on the rich - preferably to the JFK-Carter rates - and we just did the opposite, cutting taxes on the rich and corporations $5 trillion more, paid for by slashing Medicaid and other benefits to the American people, and adding over $1 trillion more to the debt in the next decade.

Republican voters have been conned - to think of these tax cuts as helping them, to think that giving the rich more benefits them. A huge propaganda operation has sold them on the con. Pictures aren't lying here.

The rich should at least send these Republican voters who have handed over the wealth of the American people to the rich a thank you. But why?
 
Craig234 said:
Simple chart:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipe...1percentUSA.png/300px-2008_Top1percentUSA.png

What it shows is that FDR started an improvement in the country, since when inequality was too high, reducing it by taxing the biggest incomes more.

As a result, the share of income going to the top 1% shrunk from nearly 25% to under 10% just before Reagan.

And that was great for the American people. That's when the middle class exploded - and we had all kinds of progress and businesses growing.

Were the rich horribly off, mistreated, with only 10% of the income? No, we still had rich people, we still had Wall Street, we still had CEO's, we still had mansions.

But it was a lot better for most Americans at sharing in the prosperity. People could buy a home and make a living for their family on one normal income.

Republicans, ask yourselves a question. What is the best share of income for the top 1%?

I'll wait a moment. OK, you didn't answer, just sputtering about some ideology that we shouldn't care or something.

But as their share goes up - 5%, to 10%, to 15%, 20%, to 25% - by definition, that's all money from your (the American people's) pockets. That's your wages NOT going up. That's every dollar of real growth being taken by the top few.

And what do we have to show for the decades of the chart above of the rich taking so much more?

The answer is, nothing for the American people.

Not that much changed. No explosion of better companies with better products more than before. No benefits. Just the same type of companies, the same types of CEOs, but being paid far more. Their wages going from 25 times the average worker to up to 400 times the average worker. And guess where all that increase came from? Yes, by definition, the rest of society, the workers. The company made a lot more money, and it all went to the top. No trickle down in decades.

So what have you learned about having the rich skyrocket in wealth at the expense of the rest of society? You have learned that no, the rich getting a lot richer doesn't create some massive increase in higher growth. Not only was growth higher with the rich taking a smaller share, but then that higher growth was shared - now it's not. You have learned there is no 'trickle down'.

You have learned that the only thing the rich getting richer does is make the rich richer, at the expense of everyone else, that it LOWERS growth by diverting wealth away from the economy to be used and simply bids up the prices of companies and stocks instead of being in the hands of people to start companies or buy products. And don't forget to include our going from under $1 trillion in debt to over $20 trillion, because every dollar of the tax cuts for the rich since Reagan is added to debt.

That's the dirty little secret behind the policy, that makes the tax cuts for the rich seem like less problem than they are, because the American people aren't paying for them all now - they're just adding them to our debt. And the American people
are increasing their own debt to make up for all the lost share of income.

Look at this chart, the growth of debt before and after Reagan:

http://static6.businessinsider.com/...00-/screen shot 2013-04-09 at 11.27.03 am.jpg

And for that matter, look at how our debt is increasing to others - how before Reagan, non-Americans owned a steady under 5% of our debt, but since Reagan it's increased to nearly 20%:

http://static3.businessinsider.com/...526/screen shot 2013-04-09 at 11.29.04 am.jpg

Republicans need to learn that the reduction of the taxes on the rich has been a scam with a heavy price for the American people, doing nothing but making the rich richer.

It's estimated that wages are about a third lower than they wold have been under the tax rates before Reagan. That's handing over trillions to the rich. It hurts growth and it's given our country a huge amount owed. And the interest on that debt is taken out of the American people's pockets - and future Americans' pockets.

There is no better economic policy we could do right now than raising taxes on the rich - preferably to the JFK-Carter rates - and we just did the opposite, cutting taxes on the rich and corporations $5 trillion more, paid for by slashing Medicaid and other benefits to the American people, and adding over $1 trillion more to the debt in the next decade.

Republican voters have been conned - to think of these tax cuts as helping them, to think that giving the rich more benefits them. A huge propaganda operation has sold them on the con. Pictures aren't lying here.

The rich should at least send these Republican voters who have handed over the wealth of the American people to the rich a thank you. But why?
Click to expand...

When will the Democrats learn that handing poor people someone else's money to the tune of $22 trillion in 50 years won't, as Johnson claimed it would, "cure it" nor "prevent it"?
 
You make no reference to technology and its role in inequality. I guess it's strictly a political issue and nothing market driven about it?
 
cawacko said:
You make no reference to technology and its role in inequality. I guess it's strictly a political issue and nothing market driven about it?
Click to expand...

That's a little like saying, 'so no German Jews were killed by anything other than the Holocaust?' Well, yes they were, but that doesn't change the issue. Yes, technology is another factor. That doesn't change the importance of the tax cut policies.
 
Craig234 said:
That's a little like saying, 'so no German Jews were killed by anything other than the Holocaust?' Well, yes they were, but that doesn't change the issue. Yes, technology is another factor. That doesn't change the importance of the tax cut policies.
Click to expand...

Unless you are going to try and stop future growth technology is the major driver. It has created astronomical wealth but along with globalization has left some folks behind. Our housing policies in California create more inequality than taxes do.
 
Craig234 said:
Simple chart:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipe...1percentUSA.png/300px-2008_Top1percentUSA.png

What it shows is that FDR started an improvement in the country, since when inequality was too high, reducing it by taxing the biggest incomes more.

As a result, the share of income going to the top 1% shrunk from nearly 25% to under 10% just before Reagan.

And that was great for the American people. That's when the middle class exploded - and we had all kinds of progress and businesses growing.

Were the rich horribly off, mistreated, with only 10% of the income? No, we still had rich people, we still had Wall Street, we still had CEO's, we still had mansions.

But it was a lot better for most Americans at sharing in the prosperity. People could buy a home and make a living for their family on one normal income.

Republicans, ask yourselves a question. What is the best share of income for the top 1%?

I'll wait a moment. OK, you didn't answer, just sputtering about some ideology that we shouldn't care or something.

But as their share goes up - 5%, to 10%, to 15%, 20%, to 25% - by definition, that's all money from your (the American people's) pockets. That's your wages NOT going up. That's every dollar of real growth being taken by the top few.

And what do we have to show for the decades of the chart above of the rich taking so much more?

The answer is, nothing for the American people.

Not that much changed. No explosion of better companies with better products more than before. No benefits. Just the same type of companies, the same types of CEOs, but being paid far more. Their wages going from 25 times the average worker to up to 400 times the average worker. And guess where all that increase came from? Yes, by definition, the rest of society, the workers. The company made a lot more money, and it all went to the top. No trickle down in decades.

So what have you learned about having the rich skyrocket in wealth at the expense of the rest of society? You have learned that no, the rich getting a lot richer doesn't create some massive increase in higher growth. Not only was growth higher with the rich taking a smaller share, but then that higher growth was shared - now it's not. You have learned there is no 'trickle down'.

You have learned that the only thing the rich getting richer does is make the rich richer, at the expense of everyone else, that it LOWERS growth by diverting wealth away from the economy to be used and simply bids up the prices of companies and stocks instead of being in the hands of people to start companies or buy products. And don't forget to include our going from under $1 trillion in debt to over $20 trillion, because every dollar of the tax cuts for the rich since Reagan is added to debt.

That's the dirty little secret behind the policy, that makes the tax cuts for the rich seem like less problem than they are, because the American people aren't paying for them all now - they're just adding them to our debt. And the American people
are increasing their own debt to make up for all the lost share of income.

Look at this chart, the growth of debt before and after Reagan:

http://static6.businessinsider.com/...00-/screen shot 2013-04-09 at 11.27.03 am.jpg

And for that matter, look at how our debt is increasing to others - how before Reagan, non-Americans owned a steady under 5% of our debt, but since Reagan it's increased to nearly 20%:

http://static3.businessinsider.com/...526/screen shot 2013-04-09 at 11.29.04 am.jpg

Republicans need to learn that the reduction of the taxes on the rich has been a scam with a heavy price for the American people, doing nothing but making the rich richer.

It's estimated that wages are about a third lower than they wold have been under the tax rates before Reagan. That's handing over trillions to the rich. It hurts growth and it's given our country a huge amount owed. And the interest on that debt is taken out of the American people's pockets - and future Americans' pockets.

There is no better economic policy we could do right now than raising taxes on the rich - preferably to the JFK-Carter rates - and we just did the opposite, cutting taxes on the rich and corporations $5 trillion more, paid for by slashing Medicaid and other benefits to the American people, and adding over $1 trillion more to the debt in the next decade.

Republican voters have been conned - to think of these tax cuts as helping them, to think that giving the rich more benefits them. A huge propaganda operation has sold them on the con. Pictures aren't lying here.

The rich should at least send these Republican voters who have handed over the wealth of the American people to the rich a thank you. But why?
Click to expand...

I’m good wit it
 
Yeah, giving it to the wealthy is such a great idea. You guys cannot learn. The wealthy are training their lap dogs.
 
Craig234 said:
Simple chart:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipe...1percentUSA.png/300px-2008_Top1percentUSA.png

What it shows is that FDR started an improvement in the country, since when inequality was too high, reducing it by taxing the biggest incomes more.

As a result, the share of income going to the top 1% shrunk from nearly 25% to under 10% just before Reagan.

And that was great for the American people. That's when the middle class exploded - and we had all kinds of progress and businesses growing.

Were the rich horribly off, mistreated, with only 10% of the income? No, we still had rich people, we still had Wall Street, we still had CEO's, we still had mansions.

But it was a lot better for most Americans at sharing in the prosperity. People could buy a home and make a living for their family on one normal income.

Republicans, ask yourselves a question. What is the best share of income for the top 1%?

I'll wait a moment. OK, you didn't answer, just sputtering about some ideology that we shouldn't care or something.

But as their share goes up - 5%, to 10%, to 15%, 20%, to 25% - by definition, that's all money from your (the American people's) pockets. That's your wages NOT going up. That's every dollar of real growth being taken by the top few.

And what do we have to show for the decades of the chart above of the rich taking so much more?

The answer is, nothing for the American people.

Not that much changed. No explosion of better companies with better products more than before. No benefits. Just the same type of companies, the same types of CEOs, but being paid far more. Their wages going from 25 times the average worker to up to 400 times the average worker. And guess where all that increase came from? Yes, by definition, the rest of society, the workers. The company made a lot more money, and it all went to the top. No trickle down in decades.

So what have you learned about having the rich skyrocket in wealth at the expense of the rest of society? You have learned that no, the rich getting a lot richer doesn't create some massive increase in higher growth. Not only was growth higher with the rich taking a smaller share, but then that higher growth was shared - now it's not. You have learned there is no 'trickle down'.

You have learned that the only thing the rich getting richer does is make the rich richer, at the expense of everyone else, that it LOWERS growth by diverting wealth away from the economy to be used and simply bids up the prices of companies and stocks instead of being in the hands of people to start companies or buy products. And don't forget to include our going from under $1 trillion in debt to over $20 trillion, because every dollar of the tax cuts for the rich since Reagan is added to debt.

That's the dirty little secret behind the policy, that makes the tax cuts for the rich seem like less problem than they are, because the American people aren't paying for them all now - they're just adding them to our debt. And the American people
are increasing their own debt to make up for all the lost share of income.

Look at this chart, the growth of debt before and after Reagan:

http://static6.businessinsider.com/...00-/screen shot 2013-04-09 at 11.27.03 am.jpg

And for that matter, look at how our debt is increasing to others - how before Reagan, non-Americans owned a steady under 5% of our debt, but since Reagan it's increased to nearly 20%:

http://static3.businessinsider.com/...526/screen shot 2013-04-09 at 11.29.04 am.jpg

Republicans need to learn that the reduction of the taxes on the rich has been a scam with a heavy price for the American people, doing nothing but making the rich richer.

It's estimated that wages are about a third lower than they wold have been under the tax rates before Reagan. That's handing over trillions to the rich. It hurts growth and it's given our country a huge amount owed. And the interest on that debt is taken out of the American people's pockets - and future Americans' pockets.

There is no better economic policy we could do right now than raising taxes on the rich - preferably to the JFK-Carter rates - and we just did the opposite, cutting taxes on the rich and corporations $5 trillion more, paid for by slashing Medicaid and other benefits to the American people, and adding over $1 trillion more to the debt in the next decade.

Republican voters have been conned - to think of these tax cuts as helping them, to think that giving the rich more benefits them. A huge propaganda operation has sold them on the con. Pictures aren't lying here.

The rich should at least send these Republican voters who have handed over the wealth of the American people to the rich a thank you. But why?
Click to expand...

Sure....its called "capitalism". And of course...goods and services are provided in exchange for currency. Its all done under FREE WILL market exchanges. If you don't want a product....don't buy it. If you aren't happy making someone wealthy stop purchasing their goods and services. Damn SNOWFLAKES. (:

It should be a simple thing to provide the objective news article of the last person to starve to death in the United States of America....or the last person to die due to a lack of emergency medical help (that they did not willingly refuse).

The US does not have a TAX PROBLEM....as the governments of the US take in almost 7 trillion dollars annually......the US has a spending and waste problem....on top of a left wing "JEALOUSLY" problem. I suggest reading the 10th commandment. "Thou shalt not covet anything belonging to one's neighbor......". Or another commandment, "Thou shalt nor worship a graven image...." Money is always the first and last thing worshiped by any leftist....especially OPM....other peoples money.
 
Last edited:
Nordberg said:
Yeah, giving it to the wealthy is such a great idea. You guys cannot learn. The wealthy are training their lap dogs.
Click to expand...

You idiots on the left have given $22 trillion to the poor over the past 50 years with the stated goal of prevent poverty. What has that done? Nothing. The poor are still poor and as long as you continue to give them something they didn't earn, they'll continue to be poor.
 
cawacko said:
Unless you are going to try and stop future growth technology is the major driver. It has created astronomical wealth but along with globalization has left some folks behind. Our housing policies in California create more inequality than taxes do.
Click to expand...

The topic of this thread is tax policy, not technology.

If you want to discuss the issue of how technology affects inequality, do it in your own thread. You're not capable of actually discussing the threat topic of tax policy at the same time, and that means you would just try to derail.
 
Craig234 said:
Predictably, you ignore the information in the OP showing the rich getting vastly richer at the expense of the American people, and all you have is a semantic topic.
Click to expand...

How is it "at the expense of the American people?" You act like all money accumulated is the gov'ts in a zero sum game scenario and they disperse it at their will.

That's not how things operate
 
Craig234 said:
The topic of this thread is tax policy, not technology.

If you want to discuss the issue of how technology affects inequality, do it in your own thread. You're not capable of actually discussing the threat topic of tax policy at the same time, and that means you would just try to derail.
Click to expand...

Maybe you could acknowledge tax policy is lower on the ladder for causes of inequality. Again, look at our state with its high taxes and massive inequality.
 
Craig234 said:
Predictably, you ignore the information in the OP showing the rich getting vastly richer at the expense of the American people, and all you have is a semantic topic.
Click to expand...

The public isn't paying money to the wealthy on tax cuts. Everyone pays less of their own money in taxes, except where tax credits are concerned.
 
cawacko said:
Maybe you could acknowledge tax policy is lower on the ladder for causes of inequality. Again, look at our state with its high taxes and massive inequality.
Click to expand...

Maybe you could not avoid the topic by trying to change the subject. Naw, you can't stay on topic. Red herring! Look! Squirrel!
 
cawacko said:
How is it "at the expense of the American people?" You act like all money accumulated is the gov'ts in a zero sum game scenario and they disperse it at their will.

That's not how things operate
Click to expand...

Because instead of everyone sharing in the country's prosperity, all the growth for decades has gone to a small percent at the top.

Your question is absurd. It's like asking, if a company cut salaries by $100 million to give the CEO a $100 million pay raise, 'how is that at the expense of the workers?' You can't use common sense because you are an ideologue.

All you can do is rant about semantics in the other thread, or your dogma about the role of government, all you care about is your dogma, not the effect, no matter how oppressive inequality becomes.

It's sick. While it's not a 'zero sum game', it is worth understanding the ways it is for policy, and how yes, government CAN and SHOULD look at distribution of wealth as a top factor in tax rates.
 
Craig234 said:
Because instead of everyone sharing in the country's prosperity, all the growth for decades has gone to a small percent at the top.

Your question is absurd. It's like asking, if a company cut salaries by $100 million to give the CEO a $100 million pay raise, 'how is that at the expense of the workers?' You can't use common sense because you are an ideologue.

All you can do is rant about semantics in the other thread, or your dogma about the role of government, all you care about is your dogma, not the effect, no matter how oppressive inequality becomes.

It's sick. While it's not a 'zero sum game', it is worth understanding the ways it is for policy, and how yes, government CAN and SHOULD look at distribution of wealth as a top factor in tax rates.
Click to expand...

The government should do no such thing. The founders didn't build it so that it could pick winners and losers. Like the workers in your scenario, who do not own the company payroll, the revenues from taxes do not belong to the government and its bureaucrats.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top