Skip to main content

Rich/Poor Income Gap Widening To Chasm.

(CBS) There have always been "haves" and "have-nots" in the United States, but over the past three decades, the gap between them has gotten a lot wider, statistics from congressional numbers crunchers show.

According to the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office, income for the bottom half of American households rose six percent since 1979 but, through 2005, the income of the top one percent skyrocketed - by 228 percent.

And, correspondent Benno Schmidt reported in The Early Show's "Early Wake-Up Call" Saturday, the impact of the growing disparity on the "have-nots," and even on small businesspeople, is being felt more and more.

Schmidt visited Adam Rames who, after 35 years, is saying goodbye to the only way of life he's known - his formerly thriving meatpacking business in New York City.
Link
''Freedom of the press is not an end in itself but a means to the end of [achieving] a free society.”
Original Post

Replies sorted oldest to newest

quote:
Originally posted by flotown79:
Nobluedog there are jobs out there. Yes they might not pay as much as some would like, but they do pay. The military is always hiring and it is an option for anyone 18-42. No, the pay is not great but the benefits are better than most companies.



The majority of young people who join the military, do so because they can’t find work in their own country because Bush gave tax breaks to those corporations who close down here and put us out of work and go overseas for cheaper labor.
quote:
Originally posted by Nobluedog:
quote:
Originally posted by flotown79:
Nobluedog there are jobs out there. Yes they might not pay as much as some would like, but they do pay. The military is always hiring and it is an option for anyone 18-42. No, the pay is not great but the benefits are better than most companies.



The majority of young people who join the military, do so because they can’t find work in their own country because Bush gave tax breaks to those corporations who close down here and put us out of work and go overseas for cheaper labor.



They left town because between the unions, environmentalist idiots, and the tax-raising defacrats; what would be the purpose of staying?
quote:
Originally posted by Nobluedog:

The majority of young people who join the military, do so because they can’t find work in their own country because Bush gave tax breaks to those corporations who close down here and put us out of work and go overseas for cheaper labor.


Facts please. That is not why my two brothers, one sister, wife, and I joined. Does that hold true for those that joined under Pres Clinton like myself?
quote:
The majority of young people who join the military, do so because they can’t find work in their own country because Bush gave tax breaks to those corporations who close down here and put us out of work and go overseas for cheaper labor.


I think that most people who join the military do so for other reasons than being out of work. The places where there has been high unemployment for some time now like Michigan have a majority of Demoncrats in office. The tax base needed to fund free stuff for freeloaders has run off or destroyed the highly paid manufacturing jobs.
quote:
Originally posted by No Blue Dog



The majority of young people who join the military, do so because they can’t find work in their own country because Bush gave tax breaks to those corporations who close down here and put us out of work and go overseas for cheaper labor.

That sir,is a direct slap in the face to every brave man and women who volunteer to take the chance of getting their butt shot off to protect our freedoms.If they were simply in it for the money,do you honestly think we would still have the best military in the world?
Bush gave tax breaks to those corporations who close down here and put us out of work and go overseas for cheaper labor."


This is not even logical. IF the evil Bush gave them tax breaks, why did they close down and leave? Now once Obama taxes them to death, YES, Blue, They ARE GONE!


To our military personnel, please ignore any whining you may hear. Think of it as an annoying little mosquito just wanting to suck blood of the 'rich' and then go away.
quote:
Originally posted by flotown79:
The real question is what are the have-nots doing to become the haves? Sitting on the couch ab pouting is not going to work. There are many opportunities out there. Even the Army helps those that want to join get their GED.


Or maybe they are cleaning up rooms in the Marriott so you can have a comfortable place to stay when you are off on your vacation, or busing tables, and serving drinks in the local eatery for that dollar tip (she brought you sweetened tea and you definatly told her un-sweet), or maybe working the night shift at the local quick mark hoping some idiot dosn't come in with a gun and shoot them , or working in the burger joint because that is the only job available right now. Maybe they are picking up your garbage before daylight, or picking the vegetables and fruit you eat.
My point is, that although all you fortunate well off people may render these broad based judgements, there actually ARE people who work hard, sometimes 2 shifts at minimum wages which you then whine about when congress tries to increase them, and are not at all well off.

I have found an interesting thing about money. If you are able to catch a break and actually acquire a little, much more seems to come your way. On the other hand, if you aren't able to get a little ahead, less and less comes your way..
I get kinda tired of reading what some of you write assuming that all poor people lay up on the couch, or "make meth". Sure that happens, but the vast majority of poor ,are working poor.

79, I'm kinda surprised you would be the type to pre-judge.
I'm pretty sure those with careers are not making meth. They choose manufacturing meth to make drug money and pay for their addiction.

When minimum wage is raised, those making a few more dollars than minimum wage actually take a pay cut.

Where do you think the extra money to pay the increase comes from? The cost of goods or services increase to cover the increase in minimum wage.

Minimum wage jobs are jobs, not careers.
Or, you could be working at the Marriott cleaning rooms, serving drinks or busing tables while learning to a chef, then executive chef and the food and beverage manager.

McDonalds put me thru college. Too bad, you consider anyone working at a burger joint to be a life long menial.

The US has the most fluid work force on the globe. That includes up and down the scale.

In short, QYB, get to work and better yourself.
quote:
Originally posted by excelman:

79, I'm kinda surprised you would be the type to pre-judge.


You have misunderstood my statement. Maybe I didn't explain it in detail.

Up until my wife joined the Navy in '04 I worked two jobs to support my household. Military by day and I worked at Longs Drugs at night. My statement was not to include those that attempt to make a honest living. It was to those that refuse to try or blame the white man for all of their problems.

I have flipped burgers at the Mc Donalds and worked at Kmart not because I wanted to but because my wife and child needed me to.

All I know is that I know a lot of people that refuse to do certain jobs because of pride. Me, I have no pride. I will shovel, you know what, to keep a roof over my family's head.
quote:
Originally posted by Chow:
I'm pretty sure those with careers are not making meth. They choose manufacturing meth to make drug money and pay for their addiction.

When minimum wage is raised, those making a few more dollars than minimum wage actually take a pay cut.

Where do you think the extra money to pay the increase comes from? The cost of goods or services increase to cover the increase in minimum wage.

Minimum wage jobs are jobs, not careers.



You're wasting your time. commie libs will NEVER understand that. They just think businesses take the loss themselves instead of passing it on to the consumers or eliminating jobs. They haven't the brain power to make that connection. It's become pretty obvious over the years. I can remember when a can drink was a dime and now they are .75. Of course the minimum wage was around $1.60 at that time. Do you see the correlation, libs? Of course you don't.
quote:
Originally posted by Nobluedog:
quote:
Originally posted by flotown79:
Nobluedog there are jobs out there. Yes they might not pay as much as some would like, but they do pay. The military is always hiring and it is an option for anyone 18-42. No, the pay is not great but the benefits are better than most companies.



The majority of young people who join the military, do so because they can’t find work in their own country because Bush gave tax breaks to those corporations who close down here and put us out of work and go overseas for cheaper labor.


"...BUSH gives tax breaks to those corporations..."??? You don't have a clue,,,President Bush does not write tax codes, you are just repeating the talking points you have heard. Let's see who Obama gives the tax breaks to...my guess is NO ONE...after all, he did promise to spread the wealth around.
Why should there not be a gap?? Personal ambition, achievement, accomplishments...these things separate the haves from the have nots. By the time I was in the fifth grade, I could tell who, in my class, would be successful and who would be griping because the income gap was widening. Life is about decisions and to a large degree, you control your own destiny by the choices that you make. In other words, you might be a four letter man but you will probably wind up working for the guy who spent his time on the books instead of the playing field. Those goof offs in middle school are still goofing off, it just looks different now that it has some age on it...
quote:
Originally posted by Chow:
Does that remind you of Obama's tax plan, 95% of the workers getting a supposed tax cut only to pay more for all goods later on.

Seems they forgot that Bush's tax cuts will disappear so does that actually mean an increase?

Can't speak now for "later on", and neither can you but for myself :
Bush tax cut = $0.19 per 2 weeks.
Obama tax cut = $22.00 every week.

I don't know what course others may take but for me give me Obama style tax cuts, or give me --a hamburger.
quote:
Originally posted by excelman:
quote:
Originally posted by Chow:
Does that remind you of Obama's tax plan, 95% of the workers getting a supposed tax cut only to pay more for all goods later on.

Seems they forgot that Bush's tax cuts will disappear so does that actually mean an increase?

Can't speak now for "later on", and neither can you but for myself :
Bush tax cut = $0.19 per 2 weeks.
Obama tax cut = $22.00 every week.

I don't know what course others may take but for me give me Obama style tax cuts, or give me --a hamburger.


And you'll give EVERY PENNY of that back in higher prices when the tax hikes on the wealthy really kick in. Of course you won't blame o'guano for that, will you?
quote:
Originally posted by kperk:
quote:
Originally posted by excelman:
quote:
Originally posted by Chow:
Does that remind you of Obama's tax plan, 95% of the workers getting a supposed tax cut only to pay more for all goods later on.

Seems they forgot that Bush's tax cuts will disappear so does that actually mean an increase?

Can't speak now for "later on", and neither can you but for myself :
Bush tax cut = $0.19 per 2 weeks.
Obama tax cut = $22.00 every week.

I don't know what course others may take but for me give me Obama style tax cuts, or give me --a hamburger.


And you'll give EVERY PENNY of that back in higher prices when the tax hikes on the wealthy really kick in. Of course you won't blame o'guano for that, will you?


I am just amazed how you think that tax breaks for people like myself are a bad thing, but tax breaks for people who make more than a quarter million dollars is good.

Returning the tax code for those to what it was in the 90's when our economy worked for all citizens which I believe will take it up from 34% to 39% will not bring the gloom and doom you predict.
In fact, I suspect, if the truth is known, you are already benefiting from lesser taxes.
quote:
Originally posted by excelman:
quote:
Originally posted by kperk:
quote:
Originally posted by excelman:
quote:
Originally posted by Chow:
Does that remind you of Obama's tax plan, 95% of the workers getting a supposed tax cut only to pay more for all goods later on.

Seems they forgot that Bush's tax cuts will disappear so does that actually mean an increase?

Can't speak now for "later on", and neither can you but for myself :
Bush tax cut = $0.19 per 2 weeks.
Obama tax cut = $22.00 every week.

I don't know what course others may take but for me give me Obama style tax cuts, or give me --a hamburger.


And you'll give EVERY PENNY of that back in higher prices when the tax hikes on the wealthy really kick in. Of course you won't blame o'guano for that, will you?


I am just amazed how you think that tax breaks for people like myself are a bad thing, but tax breaks for people who make more than a quarter million dollars is good.

Returning the tax code for those to what it was in the 90's when our economy worked for all citizens which I believe will take it up from 34% to 39% will not bring the gloom and doom you predict.
In fact, I suspect, if the truth is known, you are already benefiting from lesser taxes.


Yes the 90's, when the majority STARTED spending money they did not have, that in turn drove the economy. It was a great time but now we have to pay for it.

Even Bill Clinton admitted he was most of the problem of the last few years.

You must be a Seinfeld fiend, Kramer says "Companies just write it off" Jerry tells him it has to come from somewhere, but like left wingers Kramer believed they just wrote it off.

Remember the last time the Rich were taxed heavily, a lot of small industries closed up shop. They quit buying their toys and the little man lost his job. You will never penalize the Rich, they just move their money to where life is good.

Explore the Great Depression when high taxation was rampant and what did the BIG Boys do, sit on the sidelines.

All those little islands in the Carribean, their banks are Loaded! Mean anything to you?

Here's a novel idea, lets cut everyones taxes and MAKE our Government quit spending the next 2 generations money!
quote:
Originally posted by Chow:


Here's a novel idea, lets cut everyones taxes and MAKE our Government quit spending the next 2 generations money!


No, you must be kidding....that makes too much sense. Let's just stick it to one group, those who make more can afford to pay more of a percentage!! They just drive around in their fancy cars, eating lobster and grey puopon mustard sandwiches anyways. let them pay more of their money to government to redistribute the wealth!!! Power to the peoples!!!!
Roll Eyes
quote:
Originally posted by excelman:
quote:
Originally posted by Chow:
Does that remind you of Obama's tax plan, 95% of the workers getting a supposed tax cut only to pay more for all goods later on.

Seems they forgot that Bush's tax cuts will disappear so does that actually mean an increase?

Can't speak now for "later on", and neither can you but for myself :
Bush tax cut = $0.19 per 2 weeks.
Obama tax cut = $22.00 every week.

I don't know what course others may take but for me give me Obama style tax cuts, or give me --a hamburger.


Link

August 17, 2004
Bush Tax Cuts Erased Income Tax Burden for 7.8 Million Families

by J. Scott Moody and Scott A. Hodge

Fiscal Fact No. 14

A wave of political “tax fairness” rhetoric in recent months has swept aside reasonable assessments of the Bush tax cuts. Tax cut critics have argued that the cuts have only helped the wealthiest Americans. However, 7.8 million low and middle-income families had their entire income tax liabilities erased by the cuts.

The two provisions most responsible for removing these families from the tax rolls were the new 10 percent tax bracket and the doubling of the value of the child tax credit from $500 to $1,000.

Using the Tax Foundation’s Individual Tax Model and Matched IRS/Census Database, Foundation economists were able to compile a demographic profile of the 7.8 million families knocked off the tax roles because of the Bush tax cuts. Their results show that these families are overwhelmingly modest-income, married couples with children who work full-time and are younger than age 45. When all of the dependents of these households are counted, roughly 25.5 million Americans were taken off the tax rolls by the Bush tax cuts.

How the Bush Cuts Erase Tax Liabilities
Table 1 below illustrates the impact of the 2001 and 2003 Bush tax cuts on the income tax liability owed by a hypothetical family of four earning $40,000 per year (for simplicity figures are unadjusted for inflation). Under 2000 tax law, the couple would owe $2,158. But under 2004 tax law, they owe nothing—illustrating the large impact of the Bush extension of the child credit on reducing the tax liability of families with children to zero.



Source: Tax Foundation

Income
As Table 2 shows, more than 90 percent of the 7.8 million families knocked off the tax rolls by the Bush tax cuts earn less than $50,000 per year. Another 9.3 percent of these families earn between $50,000 and $100,000, while just 0.06 percent earn more than $100,000.

Table 2
90 Percent of Families Removed from Tax Rolls Earn Less than $50,000

Adjusted Gross Income


Percent of 7.8 Million Families in Each Income Group
$0 - $19,999
23.5%

$20,000 - $24,999
16.7%

$25,000 - $29,999
10.7%

$30,000 - $39,999
26.0%

$40,000 - $49,999
13.8%

$50,000 - $74,999
8.1%

$75,000 - $99,999
1.1%

$100,000 and Above
0.06%

Source: Tax Foundation Individual Tax Model

Age
The evidence of the child credit’s effectiveness at reducing family tax burdens is that the Americans knocked off the rolls by the tax cuts are overwhelmingly young and in the prime years for raising families with children. As Table 3 shows, nearly 38 percent of these families are younger than age 35, while nearly 75 percent are under age 45. Another 17 percent of these families are between the ages of 45 and 55, while the remaining 8.5 percent are above the age of 55.

Table 3
Zero-payers are Overwhelmingly Young Families

Age of Taxpayer


Percent of 7.8 Million Families in Each Income Group

24 and Under
12.0%

25 - 34
25.9%

35 - 44
36.5%

45 - 54
17.0%

55 and Older
8.5%

Source: Tax Foundation Individual Tax Model

Marital Status
Table 4 displays the breakdown of tax filing status for these families. Nearly 62 percent are married couples (filing jointly or separately), while just 13 percent are singles. Interestingly, more than 25 percent of these families are headed by a single parent filing as a “head of household.” Looking below the numbers, our model estimates that women are the major breadwinner in roughly 44 percent of these 7.8 million zero-paying families. Considering these figures, it would make sense that the majority of the families headed by a single parent are in fact single mothers with children.

Table 4
Majority of Families Removed from Tax Rolls Are Married Couples and Mothers with Children

Filing Status


Percent of 7.8 Million in Each Filing Status

Single
13.0%

Married Filing Jointly or Separately
61.6%

Head of household
25.4%

Widow(er) with dependent child (surviving spouse)
0.1%

Source: Tax Foundation Individual Tax Model

Work and Occupational Status
The families knocked off the tax rolls by the Bush tax cuts are overwhelmingly composed of full-time workers. Indeed, nearly 79 percent of these Americans had worked full-time during the past year, while less than 12 percent worked part-time.

While these workers are found across all sectors of the economy, we found them to be concentrated in manufacturing, construction and retail. Table 5 lists some of the major industries these workers are employed in.

Add Reply

Post

Untitled Document
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×