How Obama lost the middle class

[loyek590]

premise #5. Isn't that sort of like making all savings exactly like a traditional IRA and everything else treated as ordinary income subject to an income tax?

the problem of course would arrive when the government has to decide exactly what "saving" is. If I start a restaurant, is the net worth of that business my "savings"? If I buy an apartment building and collect rent, is that a business or my life savings? Or for that matter, if my 401k is invested in the aggressive growth fund, is that savings?

like most of these schemes, starts off simple and then gets complicated
but I like the out of the box idea, and it's worth discussing

 

[Max E.]

Yeah, the rise in housing prices has nothing to do with the fed, and keynsians intentionally destroying the dollar hey?

Why have weddings and houses gotten so ridiculously expensive? Blame inequality.
by Robert H. Frank on January 16, 2015

"I've been studying inequality for more than 30 years, and for most of that time it's been an issue well out of the limelight. And so I've been delighted to see it enter the political conversation in a big way recently.

"But something major is missing from that conversation, which centers on questions of fairness. Fairness clearly matters, but focusing on it presupposes a zero-sum competition between different classes. That's consistent with the conventional view that inequality is good for the rich and bad for the poor, and so the rich should favor it while the poor should oppose it. But the conventional view is wrong.

"High levels of inequality are bad for the rich, too, and not just because inequality offends norms of fairness. As I'll explain, inequality is also extremely wasteful.

"It's easy to demonstrate that growing income disparities have made life more difficult not just for the poor, but also for the economy's ostensible winners — the very wealthy. The good news is that a simple change in tax policy could free up literally trillions of dollars a year without requiring painful sacrifices from anyone. If that claim strikes you as far-fetched, you'll be surprised to see that it rests on only five simple premises."

The five premises >>

 

[WeToddDid2]

Nonsense. Empowering the rich further simply gives them more power over and from within government. And they don't need more power.

Define "rich".

 

[Ricter]

Yeah, the rise in housing prices has nothing to do with the fed, and keynsians intentionally destroying the dollar hey?

You're an old man already.

 

[jem]

the article is interesting and I glad people are starting to wake up to debt based drone / peasantry being causes by govt supported cronyism... . but the answer is far more simple.

1. crazy dollar creation allowed the world to compete for our assets.

2. mortgage debt. guranteed student loan debt. govt backed and provided medical programs.
whereever the govt gets in and distorts the market... the asset gets over priced and eats up more of the groups and therefore individuals income.

the more they allow people to borrow the higher the price of the asset.
govt backed mortgages... less that 80 20 loans... govt back education loans...
all allowed these costs to get out of control... so 2 people had to go to work.
and then it levers up again.

The systemic malfeasance a govt which supports cronies providing education and mortgage loans and to some degeree health care... and anything else we already spend a lot of money on must be contemplated by more people.

it turns us all in debt slaves in the long run... especially if no one is tracking how many electronic dollars are created and where they go.

 

[Ricter]

"the more they allow people to borrow the higher the..."
Who is "they"?

 

[loyek590]

Define "rich".

50/50, if you are in the top 50 you are rich, no matter how poor you are

and if you are in the bottom 50 you are poor, even if you are not doing that bad

and that is exactly where the progressive tax rate should be, below 50 you get the good rate, above 50 you get the bad rate

 

[Max E.]

You're an old man already.

Nope, im young, and im wealthy, and your old and poor, and it pisses you off big time doesnt it?

 

[Ricter]

Nope, im young, and im wealthy, and your old and poor, and it pisses you off big time doesnt it?

Your body only is young, your mind is rutted.
Why would I be mad about our ages? We're in the same line.

 

[Max E.]

Your body only is young, your mind is rutted.
Why would I be mad about our ages?

Your the one who is under the impression that the dollar hasnt lost any value and you can still go out to a restaraunt and feed the family with a sawbuck, and im supposedly the one with an old mind???