Page 16 of 17 FirstFirst ... 6121314151617 LastLast
Results 376 to 400 of 404
  1. #376
    I play pretty, no? TeyshaBlue's Avatar
    My Team
    Dallas Mavericks
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Post Count
    13,319
    I don't agree with that. Providing access to capital for good business proposals adds value to our economy especially if the business is successful and it creates risk for the lender.
    Exactly.

  2. #377
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Post Count
    97,514
    I don't agree with that. Providing access to capital for good business proposals adds value to our economy especially if the business is successful and it creates risk for the lender.
    capitalists supplying capital to the Real Economy for productive purposes is ok.

    but that's not what the problem is, has been for 20 years, with BigFinance.

  3. #378
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Post Count
    97,514
    A chilling mathematical model of inequality

    Economists have offered various explanations for the frustrating slowness of global growth, from excessive debt to a shifting balance of power bringing an end to an American century. A new analysis suggests there's one that deserves greater attention: the chilling effect of inequality.

    As inequality gets more pronounced, a larger fraction of the population faces more stringent budget constraints, and the spectrum of possible economic interactions open to them narrows. Fewer people have the wherewithal to engage in economic activity. This mathematical economy actually demonstrates a sharp transition, akin to the abrupt freezing of a liquid, as the level of inequality exceeds a certain threshold. Worryingly, the wealth distribution in the U.S. over the past few decades has been moving ever closer to this critical edge.

    it gets at the intricacies of exchange in a way that traditional macroeconomic models do not. Moreover, the effect of budget constraints on people's economic capabilities makes intuitive sense.

    the inequality diagnosis opens up interesting possibilities for policy solutions. The researchers found another interesting effect — a "trickle up" flow of wealth quite different from the usual "trickle down" picture of supply-side economics. In an economy with appreciable inequality, capital tends to flow from those with less to those with more, generating a cascade of transactions along the way.

    Hence, policy interventions aiming to spur economic activity should work better if they inject money into the system at the lower end, rather than from the top.

    http://www.sltrib.com/opinion/366541...tical-model-of

    Federal minimum wage at $25/hour. OT pay at $75K. Both indexed to inflation.



  4. #379
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Post Count
    97,514
    Median household income finally closing in on what it was in 2008, but still behind 2002





    Elise Gould at the Economic Policy Ins ute wrote earlier this month about how wage inequality continued its 35-year rise in 2015:


    • While real hourly wages (i.e., wages adjusted for inflation) grew across the board in 2015, this is largely due to a sharp dip in inflation; growth in nominal wages (i.e., wages unadjusted for inflation) has not accelerated. This dip in inflation is unlikely to be a durable source of future real wage gains.

      • Nominal wage growth of 2.2 percent remains below a level where workers would reap the benefits of economic growth.
      • There is no evidence of substantial acceleration of wages that would signal that the Federal Reserve Board should worry about incipient inflation and raise interest rates in an effort to slow the economy.


    • Real hourly wage growth in 2015 was fastest at the top of the wage distribution, illustrating that wage inequality continued its 35-year rise last year.
      • The gap between the middle and bottom has remained stable since 2000.
      • The gap between the top and everyone else has grown.

    http://www.dailykos.com/story/2016/0...28Daily+Kos%29

  5. #380
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Post Count
    97,514
    50 Billionaires Each Receive $6.3 Million in Federal Farm Subsidies

    Fifty members of the Forbes 400 list of the richest Americans—

    banking tycoon David Rockefeller Sr.,

    Microsoft co-founder Paul Allen,

    stockbroker Charles Schwab and

    dozens of other billionaires

    —received at least $6.3 million in farm subsidies between 1995 and 2014, according to an Environmental Working Group (EWG) analysis.

    And these fat cats likely received even more subsidies through the federal crop insurance program.

    http://ecowatch.com/2016/04/19/billi...arm-subsidies/



  6. #381
    dangerous floater Winehole23's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Post Count
    89,421

  7. #382
    non-essential Chris's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Post Count
    39,908

  8. #383
    dangerous floater Winehole23's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Post Count
    89,421
    Did you have a point?

    Ten data points does not a statistical correlation make. Even if it did, correlation is not causation.

    (For the record, I do not think voting for Republicans or Democrats exclusively solves anything. Do you?)

  9. #384
    ( •_•)>⌐■-■ (⌐■_■) AaronY's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Post Count
    8,287
    No one wants to live around Republicans lmao. Every major city is Democrat. If you go by population the top 100 cities have like 2% consistent republican voters. The thing here should be the Republicans taking personal stock of why they do so horrible in the cities which are the economic drivers of this country

  10. #385
    ( •_•)>⌐■-■ (⌐■_■) AaronY's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Post Count
    8,287
    Lmoa no major city ever ever regularly vote Republican but thats their problem rofl

    Like if no one liked my ass I would wonder why and take some personal inventory. Or I could just delude myself into thinking its their problem and that im the cool one lmao

  11. #386
    dangerous floater Winehole23's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Post Count
    89,421
    here's a much stronger correlation than party affiliation of elected leaders: how much revenue corporate tax abatement costs cities.

    Total revenues foregone on a per capita basis for the most recently ended fiscal year were compared to a jurisdiction’s level of income inequality, as measured by the Census Bureau’s Gini Index. Out of 446 cities and counties in our sample, the 100 with the highest levels of income inequality recorded a median per capita total tax abatement approximately double that of all others reviewed.
    http://www.governing.com/topics/fina...-affluent.html

  12. #387
    dangerous floater Winehole23's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Post Count
    89,421
    commie FT


  13. #388
    I am that guy RandomGuy's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Post Count
    50,672
    A chilling mathematical model of inequality

    Economists have offered various explanations for the frustrating slowness of global growth, from excessive debt to a shifting balance of power bringing an end to an American century. A new analysis suggests there's one that deserves greater attention: the chilling effect of inequality.

    As inequality gets more pronounced, a larger fraction of the population faces more stringent budget constraints, and the spectrum of possible economic interactions open to them narrows. Fewer people have the wherewithal to engage in economic activity. This mathematical economy actually demonstrates a sharp transition, akin to the abrupt freezing of a liquid, as the level of inequality exceeds a certain threshold. Worryingly, the wealth distribution in the U.S. over the past few decades has been moving ever closer to this critical edge.

    it gets at the intricacies of exchange in a way that traditional macroeconomic models do not. Moreover, the effect of budget constraints on people's economic capabilities makes intuitive sense.

    the inequality diagnosis opens up interesting possibilities for policy solutions. The researchers found another interesting effect — a "trickle up" flow of wealth quite different from the usual "trickle down" picture of supply-side economics. In an economy with appreciable inequality, capital tends to flow from those with less to those with more, generating a cascade of transactions along the way.

    Hence, policy interventions aiming to spur economic activity should work better if they inject money into the system at the lower end, rather than from the top.

    http://www.sltrib.com/opinion/366541...tical-model-of

    Federal minimum wage at $25/hour. OT pay at $75K. Both indexed to inflation.


    This.

  14. #389
    I am that guy RandomGuy's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Post Count
    50,672
    gini coefficient

  15. #390
    dangerous floater Winehole23's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Post Count
    89,421

  16. #391
    dangerous floater Winehole23's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Post Count
    89,421

  17. #392
    Believe. KenMcCoy's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Post Count
    851
    So what are we mad about? That between 1971 and 2015 10% more adults in the US began earning more than what is considered "Middle Income?" What did you expect with more people attending college?

    1971 - 23% below middle income, 62% middle income, 15% above middle income
    2015 - 26% below middle income, 49% middle income, 25% above middle income

  18. #393
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Post Count
    97,514
    Republicans pressure IRS to audit more Americans making as little as $20,000 per year



    Historically, the IRS has, like many government departments, been hamstrung and directed to take it relatively easy on the people with the most money.

    The majority of people claiming the EITC earn around $20,000 a year—and they are also more likely to be audited by the IRS than Americans making 20 times as much.

    (Repug) budget cuts to the IRS’s collection apparatus have hamstrung the agency’s ability to go after potentially more complicated tax evasion practices.

    Republicans have been pushing their now-standard racist and classist attacks on ‘fraudulent’ government spending, solely on the backs of people making the least amount of money.

    Put another way, as the IRS has dwindled in size and capability, audits of the poor have accounted for more of what it does.

    Last year, the IRS audited 381,000 recipients of the EITC.

    That was 36 percent of all audits the IRS conducted, up from 33 percent in 2011, when the budget cuts began.


    The IRS argues that while they do not believe the majority of incorrectly claimed EITC are purposefully fraudulent, it amounts to $17 billion in lost revenue.

    according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, the IRS’s pursuit—and their data—is fundamentally flawed.


    • IRS studies of EITC overpayments suffer from methodological problems that likely cause them to overstate somewhat the actual EITC overpayment rate, as analysis by the IRS National Taxpayer Advocate, Nina Olson, has concluded.



    People making $20,000 or less do not have the time or the income to deal with an audit from the IRS.

    They are also more likely to “lose” their audit appeal because they are less likely to have the kind of representation one needs to prove one’s legitimate claim.


    https://www.dailykos.com/stories/201...than-1-million





  19. #394
    dangerous floater Winehole23's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Post Count
    89,421
    So what are we mad about? That between 1971 and 2015 10% more adults in the US began earning more than what is considered "Middle Income?" What did you expect with more people attending college?

    1971 - 23% below middle income, 62% middle income, 15% above middle income
    2015 - 26% below middle income, 49% middle income, 25% above middle income
    Your blind spot is showing.

    Lot more folks struggling to get by. Wages went down the whole way, so did defined contribution benefits.

    At the same time, the cost of education, health care and housing went up a lot, but you got yours, so what's the problem?

  20. #395
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Post Count
    97,514
    Also, The Fake McCoy's number are %ages, not absolute numbers, where numbers give the accurate picture.

  21. #396
    dangerous floater Winehole23's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Post Count
    89,421

    Close

  22. #397
    dangerous floater Winehole23's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Post Count
    89,421
    “The top decile of America holds almost about 70% of the national wealth — 31% is held by the top 1%, while the rest of the top 10% holds about 39%. And the bottom half’s share? About 1.3%.”
    https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/ar...ign-sloganeers

  23. #398
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Post Count
    97,514
    Is that graph adjusted for inflation? I think not

    https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/wages

  24. #399
    dangerous floater Winehole23's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Post Count
    89,421
    40 years of income stagnation for half the country:


  25. #400
    dangerous floater Winehole23's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Post Count
    89,421

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •