December 11, 2012 at 7:47 pm #605867
For those that think economic inequality isn’t ridiculously out of whack, explain why this graphic shouldn’t worry us, please?
This used to look LOTS different a generation or two ago.December 12, 2012 at 4:08 pm #779504
i hope you don’t mind me upstaging you, but that’s an awesome graph. i checked tumblr; it appears to be fair game for reposting.December 13, 2012 at 5:30 am #779505December 13, 2012 at 5:55 am #779506December 13, 2012 at 1:27 pm #779507
125 million people crammed into that red dot. nothing wrong with that, eh? this is the greatest country on earth. no economic inequality or class warfare going on here. no, sir.
i’m not talking about equal distribution of wealth (or land) here. but a little balance can’t hurt, can it?December 13, 2012 at 2:06 pm #779508
I’m glad you clarified, redblack. I sometimes get the impression that people will not be happy until we all “own” an equal share. Sounds a lot like the old Soviet Union, and nothing I would ever want to be a part of.
Reality is the world needs ditch-diggers too – and our entitlement mentality leads everyone to think that – regardless of education, drive, determination and smarts – we all deserve to be CEO.
Sorry, life doesn’t (and shouldn’t) work that way. I grew up in a single parent household in the late 70’s/early 80’s that brought home less than 13K a year. My sister and I didn’t complain once about our mercedes driving neighbors because their gain had absolutely nothing to do with our situation. We put ourselves through college (work, scholarships, loans and yes – pell grants) and now have our own mercedes’.
In other words, the “pie” is not limited. Grow the damn pie.
BTW – who gets Alaska! :~)December 13, 2012 at 4:41 pm #779509December 13, 2012 at 5:24 pm #779510
“Although the (wages)ratio for each cooperative varies, it is worker-owners within that cooperative who decide through a democratic vote what these ratios should be. Thus, if a general manager of a cooperative has a ratio of 9:1, it is because its worker-owners decided it was a fair ratio to maintain.”December 13, 2012 at 6:34 pm #779511
when corporations show a profit by eliminating workers..
and lobby against spending money on infrastructure
you have an overabundance of ditch diggers
and no ditches to dig.
that’s our current realityDecember 13, 2012 at 6:51 pm #779512
Smitty, I agree with you as long as there is truly an opportunity to get that Mercedes. Fewer and fewer of the poor are able to get out of poverty now. Of course there will always be ditch diggers and CEO’s, but with our current economic structure, there is too big of a gap in income and assets. Income inequality to the degree we are seeing now is dangerous for democracy – we’re in a plutocracy, which is not what I want to be a part of.December 13, 2012 at 7:47 pm #779513
Not to mention the fact that it’s a hell of a lot harder to put yourself through college now than it was when Smitty went. College costs have increased 1200% in the last 30 years, while things like food and medical expenses have gone up 601% and 244%, respectively. Keep that in mind when you start saying things like “Well when I went to college…” I probably could have put myself through college with no debt if it was 1/30th of the cost.December 13, 2012 at 7:55 pm #779514
Lindsey, that is true – dang, I never consdidered myself an old-timer, but you are right!
That said, I probably would have lived at home and done the CC route for 2 years and then gone off to college to finish up. Still more expensive than the mid-80’s 4-year route no doubt, but costs can be mitigated a little.December 14, 2012 at 6:05 am #779515
Gee, mid 1980s, brings a tear to my eye…but it should dry up soon after 25 to 30 something years. What is the situation today, and how does influence the choices available? It is not the fact there are no ditch diggers, but there are fewer low skill jobs, or even higher skill jobs around. Travel agents? Customer support?, Retail music sales? Real estate agents? Book publisher? What field is not being affected by the Internet? Of the jobs that remain we have raised the bar– Masters Degrees…just to limit the pool for the non-automated jobs that remain. my so far un-automated two cents.December 14, 2012 at 1:36 pm #779516
smitty: sometimes when i hear conservatives call liberals “socialists,” i’m thinking, “they have to be joking, right? they can’t really believe that i advocate equal distribution of wealth for everyone. can they?”
evidently, i was wrong.
you have to admit that the laws and tax codes in america are tilted heavily toward the wealthy. (that’s why the tax code is as thick as the ACA.) but no one from my camp wants to stop the wealthy from doing what they do. this country wouldn’t be half of what it is without their investment.
but it takes labor, too. without labor, management and ownership are nothing.
and your comment about everyone wanting to be CEO is telling, too. i don’t think you realize how many people out there don’t want that responsibility – no matter how much it pays. that includes me. i believe that to be a republican philosophy, though: that the great american dream is to own a business and retire early. but some of us – i dare say most of us – just want comfort and safety. we don’t need – or even want – yachts and multiple homes and fancy cars and tax attorneys and accountants and million-dollar golf memberships so we can network.
i have to tell you, man. we ditch diggers know our place in the world. we accept it. we even take pride in it. and we want fair compensation for helping to keep the trains running on time and the brown water flowing in the right direction and the lights burning and the food hot and the kids on the bus and your office clean…
like that marxist pinko, henry ford, said: anyone who built one of his cars should be able to afford to buy one.
is that socialism? to encourage policies that allow those of us who are lower on the food chain to share in some of the 300% economic growth that the top 10% has realized during the recessions of the past four years? since, evidently, they won’t invest in the economy willingly while everyone else’s share is shrinking? even the government’s share is shrinking.
we have americans living in third-world conditions – and obviously i don’t mean the worst third-world conditions, but there is growing chronic poverty here. all they want and all any of us want is the opportunity to build more of your consumer goods and provide you with the services that you rely on.
so, during the worst of times, what’s wrong with the wealthy investing a disproportionate amount of resources into the country the country that helped them become wealthy? because i believe that the ditch-diggers have shown vast amounts of deference and patience for those who create jobs. even when they’re not creating jobs.December 14, 2012 at 3:30 pm #779517
my grandkids are going the living at home community college for the first two years route to an education…
but then, so did i.. in 1967.
the difference.. their parents are able to help them financially
mine wasn’t. Without public assistance i would never have been able to move past that associates degree.
but at this rate i really wonder what will be available for the great-grandkids :(
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.