I will just use the people around me as some examples (I know this is over generalizing). We grew up as dirt poor immigrants (although my parents were well educated, but they had to get degrees from US universities again). Now my parents, my family and my sister's family are all middle class, I am not sure what is the upper middle class cutoff point, but we are barely above median income in where we live. We will all likely reach bottom of 10% by retirement age. In my case, I only have one child because I really don't think I can afford another one(day care is more expensive than college!). I Drive cars until they are at least 15 years old, we don't eat out alot and hardly ever buy anything expensive, I got my I pad as a hand down from my parents. I will never even come close to sniffing 250k a year as a family unless i win the lotto. What I see many situations like this from my co-workers, divorce multiple times, have five or six kids and the wife does not work, should we feel bad from these white Trump supporters? If they wish, they could have be done what we did and be much better off financially. I lean more liberal because I cannot stand the hypocrisy of the GOP conservatives, even though I agree with many of their ideas. Trump is the ultimate at this game, what a joke of a president.
Poor people on this country don't starve. They go to public school. They do have opportunity being here.We may not be Europe with the safety net but we have them .Economically this really isn't a problem for poor people. Politically it's a problem because so few people, the top 10% have so much influence How is the United States compared to other industrialized nations in terms of wealth distribution
I think as a lawyer he works with economically disadvantaged I looked up some of all you guys old posts so I can sound like the real pgabriel
I think the bigger issue is the 0.1% as they truly control a good chunk of the wealth and the production. For the rest of us non millionaires there really is a skills gap, it's never been better to be skilled frankly.
You need to add some more 0's to your SOL cutoff. That's a part of the problem with inequality today is that people can't even comprehend how far above them the locked gates are. I mean even for the superrich I assume they have a hard time conceptualizing their wealth .
So you’re saying I shouldn’t worry about my wealth and well-being? Ok, then who should and why not me?
You should worry about it and that's why you should be upset about the concentration of wealth at the top. It helps make it much more difficult for you actually make it into that group. Actually, we should all worry about it because it isn't healthy for the economy, nation, or any of those who wish to have the opportunity to work hard and move upward.
How quaint. An argument between a Gaddafi lieutenant with a conscience and a Gaddafi lieutenant saying Gaddafi is the problem and the other 90% would happily tote a machine gun for the brotherly leader. The problem for the both of them is that the 90% can’t tell them apart. But at least the first guy knows this, while the second guy still clings on to “but Gaddafi....”
$250k per year ain't a magic number. I think it was from a Simon Sinek speech where he talks about you reach short term goal and you're happy for a little bit, then all your stress comes back and you go searching for the next rush if happiness. I think unless you have immense wealth or a guaranteed nba contract, you'll never feel safe and secure. Which will probably stress you out until retirement.
approximate income taxes annually: 7 months of what's worth of salary in Sweden 5 month +3 weeks in Canada 5 months in California ...for those 9.9ers , no reason to feel guilty
It's worked out exactly nowhere it's been tried, and oh has it been tried. Eggs to make omelets and such. You seem to think this is a good idea?
There used to be inheritance taxes. Those taxes which were spent on health EDUCATION and welfare helped poor people become more middle class. Not a radical idea from just a few years ago when America was more egalitarian.
Sure there is, just confiscate most of it with taxes which is what most left leaning people want to do. You are correct but this doesn't fit the narrative.
I wonder how much access to technology in the past, today and in the future has and will cause more inequality. Did the PC and digital age revolution push inequality? PC are cheaper now, but they were once quite expensive and only large company have access to them. Access to internet is now common, but not for everyone, especially those in rural area and those that can't afford $40+/M. Big data analysis is now only available to a few. Tomorrow, personal accelerator (brain, physical) embedded within individual is likely only will be initially available to the top... Not just individual, small business can't compete with the large business that have much better access to technology. The gap keeps growing with time and it seems like inequality will naturally expand if left on its own natural path.
