This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Record Social Inequality And Its Violent Aftermath, Explained By A Three Minute Cartoon
With the new medium of mass communication in all matters financial and economic having been recently discovered to be cartoons (as the penetration of written text discussing such arcane topics as the Fed, debt and addition ends up being trapped within a very narrow echo chamber), we present the latest and greatest 3 minute summary, which even a third grader will understand, of what is gradually becoming accepted as the most troubling social, economic and political development in America - record social, income and wealth inequality... and its very disturbing consequences, which at last check have resulted in some form of social upheaval in almost every situation.
Courtesy of John Lohman
And some demographic commentary from Harry Dent:
»
- 35573 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
"....based on ones ability to add value to the economy...."
Ah, there's the rub. "Value" as defined by whom?? Some social policy agenda?
Everyone decides. I guess that's another reason why it has grown out of control, they've been dictating value.
I guess you could say we live in a value based totalitarian state run by dictatorial market makers where you can't go anywhere in the market without your papers or a current Visa/Mastercard.
Crummmy
How do you lop off its head ?
Follow the yellow brick road. Apply all of the facets of constitutional clauses to all the halls of bureaucracy. Simple, fair, beautiful. Vindictive.
thank you for a voice of sanity. When Tyler throws out red meat to the angry it brings out the LATOC crowd.
Cut your consumption in half.. Starve the beast..
Can somebody please send me the contact info for a tax accountant that will help me get the 16% rate? My family and I would really appreciate it. Some of them pay near 50% between federal, state and local (NYC). Thanks in advance!
Start your own business and be amazed at all the extra tax deductions you can claim!
This is the result of Liberalism.
All commies now stand and applaud.
good job jlee!
Congratulations on having spelled the word correctly.
Your next assignment is to try to learn what it means.
Please, do go on. Elucidate, or is this your idea of "liberalism".
http://www.silverbearcafe.com/private/12.10/scam.html
Sure, it's a concept generally recognized as having started back in the days of the Renaissance.
A human-focused perspective on the world, it recognizes individuals as essentially of value, emphasizes personal liberty and autonomy, places high value on freedom of thought, and promotes a general encouragement to seek new approaches to existing problems.
The Founding Fathers were liberals.
The bad rap it gets in the USA generally stems from a concerted effort to confuse "liberalism" with "collectivism." Among those lacking any kind of historical perspective on the humanities, that confusion has become sadly prevalent.
That so many self-proclaimed "liberal" institutions are very far removed from the principles doesn't indict the concept itself. Just as the fact that Dubya (for example) spent money like a drunken sailor doesn't prove that "conservatism" is all about deficit-spending.
Thank you. Why didn't you shine a light on your thoughts in your first posting? Makes it hard to consider your point of view without anything to anchor responses to. As you can see, mine was a supposition.
corruption knows no political philosophy
Is it any wonder that the increase of income inequality accelerated after we went off the gold standard? BTW it is not only the US that suffers from this, the rest of the world as well. Money out of thin air creates asset bubbles, which only the rich (asset owners) can enjoy; bail-outs ensure that the rich will not lose money as the bubble burst; the rest enjoys a declining standard of living with rising prices and stagnant wages. Solution? Hard money and hard deflation. Let the air out of this thing once and for all.
If only it was that simple...
TPTB will not go quietly into the still night. The air will be pumped into this bag until it can no longer be supplied. Only then, will it collapse. No self-serving banker or politician will allow "hard money" or "deflation" to occur one second before it is thrust upon them.
You talk like it's avoidable.
Okay - here's a big point.
Deflation actually helps those who are OWED FIAT MONEY - I.E. Creditors.
Each dollar paid back to them is worth more than when it was loaned out, even with interest component disregarded.
Inflation actually helps those who OWE FIAT MONEY - I.E. Debtors.
See where I'm going with this?
I do realize that the U.S. Government, Britain, the PIIGS, etc. (and many others that we are told are actually in good shape as sovereigns, IMO) are big debtors, but then, on the flip side, if the big creditors own the government - yeah...why would they tell the government to create the circumstances and environment to see fiat debts owed to them debased?
+1
Did you ever think that if we just tightened up the spigot, just a little, on third world peasants flowing into the country that we wouldn't quite be in this situation?
If every wage earner in America made exactly $10,000 more next year than the year before, but we still had semi-destitute immigrants rolling over the border, income inequality would be that much greater.
When the left side of the scale is always pegged close to zero, any prosperity, even egalitarian prosperity = greater inequality.
You defended the Tuskeegee experiments and now you are blaming immigrants. Breathtaking.
Yeah, I can't blame the immigrants either. They work a fuck load harder and more cheerfully than the indigents in my experience, South Florida.
There are many, many more people in the world that would love to come to America and be net recipients of the welfare state than the system can possibly support. It's a question of math, nothing more.
Nothing personal against the S. Americans etc. that come here. If I were in their position I'd fight/lie/steal to get myself and my family over the border too.
I partially defended Tuskegee given the circumstances involved. Whether you like it or not you live with a safety net of medical capability beneath you that was constructed to a large extent via practices and methods that would not pass contemporary ethical or legal strictures.
Oh I know the Nazi's helped with hypothermia too. Guess what? It was fucking evil. Period. Should we now throw that evilly gotten knowledge away? No, that would be silly not to save lives. That doesn't justify it.
The Nazi's primary intent was to harm individual life, scientific pursuit was incidental. If nothing else the intentions of the Tuskegee experiment were, without a doubt, just the opposite and that makes a big difference.
Whoa... you lost me with that one. You can bifurcate the experimentation on human beings based on intent?
Well yeah, of course. Doesn't the FDA require human experiments for the drugs you'll likely take someday? Lots of things are determined by intent.
double post.
I will send a medical experimentation team over to your house pronto since informed consent isn't part of the equation.
Ting!
Informed consent, in the field of medical and scientific inquiry with otherwise good intentions, wasn't the default standard once upon a time but it is now. That's kind of the whole point.
So then Slavery was good until the emancipation proclamation made it illegal? I kinda think certain things extend to most times and most people. Most cultures agree upon these things as well. Poisoning, raping and murdering generally considered bad in human history whether by stealth or not.
You have gotten such an idea based outlook on the matter that it's lost all trace of humanity. Ends and intent do not justify means, sorry. That road is what paved most of the hell humanity has seen on this planet. Very few wake up in the morning with intent to do evil, they are just doing what needs doing when they launch that hellfire missile. Others on the receiving end might find a flaw in that philosophy. Your argument leads to a very slippery slope indeed.
Slavery is not a branch of scientific or medical inquiry and it certainly can't be said to directly or indirectly harbor good intentions for those on the receiving end or their peers - so you're getting a little far afield here.
At different points in history (let's just consider the U.S. here) lines have been drawn in different places indicating where the individual's interests supersede those of the group/society and vice versa. I happen to strongly favor the individual myself and consider that to be the key greatness of the U.S. Constitution but this view hasn't always carried the day. Since WWII we have been in an increasingly individual focused mode but there is strong support right now to move things in the opposite direction.
If Obamacare ever gets up to cruising speed you'll see what I mean. Decisions will be made for you for this treatment over that treatment or no treatment at all based not on (or not solely on) medical science but on what is best for the larger group as expressed by a universal policy. "For the greater good" I believe is the phrase. You'll be informed all right but your consent won't matter one way or the other.
So Tuskeegee experiment served the purpose... The propaganda machine is on.
This experiment is a story of one group using another one to collect information at a lower cost. Fact it was performed on negroes should be enough to thwart any attempt at propaganda but propagandists are failing to renew their tricks...
actually no they don't. the few they run are gamed.
There is no more filthy nest of liars and vipers than in the drug bid.
Viagra was a plesant surprise that resulted from human testing now wasn't it?
.
I don't think he is blaming immigrants. He may be blaming the businessmen who hire them and depress USA wages.
Something reasonable. Nice to see and you might be right.
Nope, but lots of very stupid people have thought that. I guess you must count them as your intellectual peers.
Once they are over the border, they are wage earners. That's WHY they come over the border.
That's a foreign policy problem, not an immigration problem. If your government didn't create and support dictatorships all around the world, you wouldn't have an immigration problem. But given that your Govs foreign policy creates oppressed slaves for your corporations, the people of those countries figure they will go straight to the source of the money, rather than work through a murderous intermediary on the US payroll.
oO
You're not connecting the dots here. If X amount of sub-min. wage immigrants enter the labor pool every year yet somehow everyone else (including last year's low wage immigrants) earns a higher annual income than they did the year before...then the inequality gap will always widen. So, everyone who has been in the country at least a year gets richer and richer -pretty much an ideal situation- yet this nasty "inequality" just gets worse and worse.
That's why the income inequality gap is at least in part a red herring.
But if you point those facts out, you're a socialist.
It's convenient that this extreme wealth disparity has happened over the same decades when it's become sacriligious to question wealth in any manner without being shouted down as a "socialist."
If I didn't know any better, I might suspect that at some point in the past the uberwealthy started funding the creation of various "think tanks" which conveniently started spreading the word that wealth should never ever be questioned by "good, conservative, Americans." And that these hypothetical "think tanks" began producing papers and lecturing and writing books reinforcing the ideology that it is un-American to question wealth.
Hmmm. But that's probably just me being paranoid, huh? But I do wonder who pays those guys sitting in those think thanks all day. I mean, they just sit in an office producing reports, and making TV appearances, that they give away for free. Wonder who pays for that, and what they expect in return?
The solution to heavily tax income will likely maintain the status quo. That's why I scream socialist at some of the ineffective policies to equalize people. The wealthy have assets. The upwardly mobile have income. If you heavily tax income then upward mobility may be a lot harder. Don't we want upward mobility?
Yes, I agree that taxing income is a bad idea all around. Taxing discourages whatever activity is being taxed (i.e. working.)
I chuckle a bit about people so adamantly against "wealth redistribution". We've already experienced some of the most extreme "wealth redistribution" in human history. It's being redistributed upwards, to the plutocrats.
I'm also amused by the misunderstanding of who the top 1% to 2% are. For every hard-working self-made Bill Gates, there are X number of Vanderbilt heirs who haven't done anything productive in their lives.
Actually studies show that ninety percent of wealth is lost by three generations. Only a small number have managed to maintain and grow their wealth through multiple generations. However this small number wields disproportionate influence over our government. We need to be careful not to vilify the mere wealthy, they are a dime a dozen.
yes this was true in the past...nowadays the big barons put their fortunes into foundations, so the wealth can live forever
Yeah that's the thing I don't like about foundations, banks and long term corporate structures as currently legally defined. Structured differently all three might have merit. The money of evil men living forever. Example JP Morgan bank.
and this is a very good point...but it is DEBT that is not to be questioned not "wealth." We are told by both Left and Right that DEBT is a social good--but in fact it is the ultimate form of thievery from us the masses to "those at the top." nothing is worse than your GOVERNMENT being in debt as well since "that's where the focus of the monied interest always lies." Higher prices and higher interest rates "are considered an unreserved good" on the so called "conservative" Kudlow and Company. Really? Not even the most virulent of capitalists considers higher costs and higher prices a social good--how can these idealogues? Quite simply "because they get richer" and "it's greed alone that counts." I do not agree with the reasons behind the revolt of the democrats against their President--but I agree wholeheartedly with the revolt as a conservative Republican. without an attendent spending reduction plan "the only thing being created here is a boat load of inflation." Needless to say "we are at war and we have to pay for that as well." Awful. Awful, awful, awful.
Good for you. It's time for all regular people of this country right, left, center, anarchist etc. to see common cause against the debt masters and their system. Our country is at stake.
Tyler,
Please take care of yourself. I have a feeling this site will increasingly become the bane of Plutocrats with little sympathy for dissension. Matt Simmons and Julian Assange pissed a lot of people off. History is written by men who have hanged heroes (to borrow a line from 'Braveheart').
Don’t worry rich people of America, there will be no social unrest for a long long time. Not while the cult of positive thinking still has a foothold in the culture. People at the bottom still believe that through hard work and not being a quitter that they will make it to the stop. It’s a shame that they do not realize there has been no social mobility for quite some time now, and I don’t think they ever will.
Uh, no.
Born to lower-middle class parents; worked my own way through college and law school (both at night to work full-time jobs during the day); paid most of my wife's private medical school tuition out of pocket (avoiding student loans).
Doing quite nicely, thank you.
Of course; we'd be doing better without confiscatory federal and state tax rates that tax earned income to death while ignoring passive income entirely.
Unfortunately, it's taken me 30 years to figure out that you can't get rich working for your money; you only get rich making your money work for you.
The secret to wealth is ironically much like an old Steve Martin joke about a two-step process to become a millionaire:
1) Get a Million dollars.
2) When the IRS comes to your door; just tell them you 'forgot' to pay taxes.
The truly wealthy stay that way by (as others above have pointed out) accumulating a 'critical mass' of wealth, and then living off investing it in tax-free (or low tax) passive investment schemes.
The whole tax code is skewed towards those who already have wealth, and against those who are trying to acquire it...
this is VERY true to a point! "unless you are plugged into the collective." and that's a BIG exception. in other words "this policy is entirely directed at equities and literally commanding us as Americans to start working at said equity collectives." Eeeks. "Work for GE or die"? I've been long equities for this very reason--but i can't stand the "living standard" being demanded by our "current regime" in order to simply survive. it's simply not "normative" as an American to live in a "company country." what's the purpose of having a country in the first place if capitalistic anarchy is the "sin quo non" of our "patriotic existence"?
Your personal story is commendable and in fact is a perfect example of exactly what needs to be happening across whole segments of society today. My point is that was happening in your generation but increasingly less likely for people going to school or leaving school now.
There is strong data which shows mobility has decreased markedly in America since the late 1960’s
uh sweetbread dear. I'm self made too. I graduated college in 1985 and my dad grew up without running water or utilities with a two seater outhouse. Fawk all of you collectivists. Upward mobility is available.
That was 25 years ago chief. A bit different for folks graduating in the class of 2010 don't you think? As it so happens I'm doing quite well, that doesn't mean I buy into some Horatio Alger Acres of Diamond bullshit. This is not 1985 with the US at the top of the heap and education, rent, food etc. a fraction of what it is now. It's MUCH worse for the kids graduating today. It also looks worse by the moment for them. Collectivism is tripe, but how about you acknowledge the Oligarchical collective that's destroying this country? They will come for your wealth next (and mine and everyone else's too), they've bled everyone else dry.
So we just quietly roll over and take it from the plutocratic/oligarchic/nepotistic overlords? Sure it's increasingly more difficult, but if it's all you've ever known does it matter? Are we frogs boiling in a pot, monkeys gripping a banana through a hole or something better? Your "we're fucked" position seems as ludicrous to me as my "if your gonna die, die with your boots on" attitude my seem to you. We share a common understanding what the problem is and where it's coming from or we might not be here discussing it, I'm just trying to ferret out a soution. Graduated 2000.
I wasn't in any way suggesting rolling over and taking it. I'm suggesting people view the situation as it is, not as it was 25 years ago in radically different circumstances. I'm saying understand the problem don't ignore it. Sounds like you aren't, but if you read BDJ's posts you get the sense that everything is great and those that don't like it should be shot.
uh sweetbread dear. I'm self made too. I graduated college in 1985 and my dad grew up without running water or utilities with a two seater outhouse. Fawk all of you collectivists. Upward mobility is available.
No kidding Sweetbread. Penny wise, trillion dollar foolish. They just can't get past their idiotic GET A JOB mentality. You can have all 6 billion cattle being run through the education factories and they would still believe in "Work hard and you will get results".
I don't have a job. I am not plugged into the collectivist hive. I'm self made in that two percent. You don't have to be cattle in an education factory, but it doesnt hurt. You don't have to have a consumerist lifestyle. These collectivist ranters are pissing me off. I'll bet my "consumption" of consumer goods is a lot lower than some of you with less income. More income and success does not necessarily mean you wish to keep up with the Joneses. It doesn't mean you are plugged into the collective.
Same here. For twenty years I made good money, but chose to live way below my means and the means of the average American. Investing has allowed me to compound my savings and now central planning redistributionists want me to feel bad about being frugal for so long? Not happening.
I have sympathy for those truly disadvantaged in some way -- and back it up with meaningful percentage of income donated to charity all of my life. But I have no sympathy for those who thought they get to spend whatever they make. No sympathy for the bottom half complainers who go to restaurants, have cable TV, have a cell phone, go to movies, buy new cars, go on vacations, live in a house larger than 1,200 sq ft, have a big screen TV, but anything except gas at a convenience store, etc, etc. -- do and have things I did not do or have for decades despite making good money.
Many folks lack savings because they lack discipline and they lack a competive drive to be the best at what they do. Mediocrity should not make you very comfortable.
I save an incredible amount considering my families income. What's more I invest and make quite a bit of money (percentage wise) doing so. That said I don't have any delusions about competing with the Rockefellers and Rothschilds. Just because you worked hard and saved does NOT mean that is the standard way in which the wealthiest became wealthy. Nay, people who work hard and save are the exception not the rule, perhaps especially with the top 1% of the top 1%.
I don't advocate some centrally planned redistribution of wealth. I certainly don't condone the current one that re-routes productive wealth to the military/intelligence complex and the FIRE economy. It was the FIRE economy that gutted this country of productive capacity to report higher quarterly profits. Where was your outrage when that was going on and the Middle Class and poor were being wiped out? Not your problem I suppose. Well the cries to redistribute wealth via the parasitic central government are a logical conclusion to the rich voting in and financing anyone who helped them get richer. Once the balance is this far out of whack you will hear those cries louder and louder. They are ignored at your peril.
Besides if the two of you are so frugal why do you feel such a need to cry "Class Warfare" at the thought of higher taxes? I'm against higher taxes for the record as the tax dollars will undoubtably be spent on murder and lining the coffers of the oligarchs for what it's worth. I take no comfort in the fact that the rich are currently keeping a straight face while arguing that others should pull themselves up by their bootstraps.
Many work FAR harder then I do and make less money and spend less too. For every person gaming the welfare state there are 9 working two jobs and barely breaking even for a variety of reasons that exist in the shades of grey world of reality.
If you stood up for civil rights the past 10 years, but are fiscally conservative I can respect that. If you voted for Bushco or Obama enjoying the status quo and turning a blind eye to the state's dictatorial behavior...go take a flying leap.
Equal relative outcomes is not a goal our country should pursue. If poverty is defined as the bottom quintile, then it can only be solved with redistribution.
I do not know what the "right" distribution of wealth should be (but am sure a number on this site are blessed with such central planning insight). What made the 1967 distribution "right" and the 2010 distribution "wrong??"
If government is picking winners and losers that you don't like, then your primary issue should be with the politicians instead of either the winners or the losers. My preference is they don't pick winners or losers, but that is a position held by very few (including the current administration).
Not sure where the "civil rights" comment is coming from, but I believe in equal opportunity, but do not believe that equal opportunity will lead to equal outcomes. Everyone is different. Some people make terrible decisions (e.g., not killing themselves to be among the best in school, spending money on totally unnecessary things, pursuing terrible relationships, etc). But I believe folks should be very free to make very bad decisions (which I understand they may view as a good decision) and to bear the consequences of those bad decisions (sometimes that feedback loop corrects poor decisions). Many of those kinds of undisciplined folks may end up in the bottom economic quintile and will want others to care for them (as they continue with the same behavior that got them there).
I understand many on this site believe that an average econcomic outcome is virtually owed to almost everyone despite whatever decisions they make (because there really are no good or bad decisions / behaviors). I am not one of those believers.
But absent ensuring equal outcomes, there will always be a bottom quintile. Everyone can not be average, nor top quintile, nor bottom quintile. And we should not begrudge, say, Steve Jobs making a pile of money.
The (D) & (R) Terrorists have won.
A moron and his money are soon parted...
Fraud St./DoC motto for 2010: The looting will continue until morale improves!
EOM
That is the best bumper sticker/graffiti idea I've seen in ages. Absolutely brilliant line.
How about those billionaires ! They have pledged to give it all away when or if they ever die....or at least a few have pledged.
The uber-class has traditionally thought way ahead of the unwashed since the days of Carnegie, Mellon and Rockefeller. Look how even the young Facebook dude jumped on the futures giveaway bandwagon. Kudos that they read up on the history of early 20th Century turmoil. If the remainder can't hear the populist train coming, I'm sure the Prince and Duchess incident was a rude wakeup call.
Yeah, I'd be a little more impressed with Zuckerberg, Gates, et al. if they had pledged to endorse small businesses rather than "I'm giving it away, look at me!" What an embarassment.
Have you any familiarity with the Gates Foundation? Your comment would suggest not.
Notice how they simply give their wealth into charities that they control? It's not really giving it away, it's just changing "who/what owns the wealth", so they can get tax-exempt status on it.
It's not an act of charity at all.
These people stoletheir wealth, hence they're "giving" it away because they're trying to bury their guilt.
People that work for their money don't give it all away.
Amusingly,
a) none of them are giving away meaningful percentages (say >20%) NOW;
b) they seem to enjoy calling attention to their planned giving (which reveals massive egos); and
c) despite a number of them calling for higher taxes, apparently do not see their own hypocrisy by not paying such higher amounts NOW regardless of what is legally owed (none of them are planning to leave their wealth to the government).
It is unclear why they would not give their wealth to the government but instead give it to private charities when they think they should be paying more in taxes. Do they somehow believe the private sector is more competent and efficient than the government sector?? If so, why should they want to pay higher taxes? Illogical.
Just stop bailing the super wealthy out and let them take their losses. That will bring the see-saw back the other way.
Of course that's exactly what The Benbernank is trying to prevent.
not to mention reneging on all free trade agreements so we actually produce something other than debt
does smoot hawley ring a bell? I thought not.
are you fuckin stupid? I think so.
ANYONE who believes that trade tariffs were the cause of the GD1 is a fool.
The unmotivated and uneducated can't expect to have economic equality, nor should they. However these phony billionaires with their 50% giveaway pledge and call for higher taxes is BS. If they want to give their money away, want higher taxes and are worried about the deficits then they should cut their checks to the US treasury. When confronted with that all of a sudden they stammer about how much better they can reallocate their capital much better than the government yet don't understand why the middle class who are working their asses off to make some coin aren't thrilled about higher taxes. Charity is one thing, but charity (higher taxes) at the threat of incarceration isn't exactly make me sleep better nor does it actually do the poor much good either. The one that benefits are the politicians.
you are notadouche. Glad to see some sanity here. It looks like the LATOC crowd is out in force tonight. I hear they are having a sale on Mountain house food. You better go to their website before it is too late!
http://www.silvergoldsilver.com/index.html
Fuck those smart-asses at Zero Hedge.
and fuck you too! Give Dickus a kiss!
Click the link dude.
bad choice of music,very annoying song.
Yes I see the unemployed whiners, the armchair anarchists, and the losers are out in force tonight. Junking everyone who has a different opinion. The real traders don't bother to read this drivel. This is one of the Tyler Durdens that likes to throw out red meat to the angry. I prefer to read the tyler durden who has real investment data.
I so very rarely junk ANYONE, but you've earned one. Again.
Why don't you go cry to YER MOMMY??? Ya fuckin' pussy.
One real comment now. For those of you who have faithfully read Roach from Morgan Stanley for the last ten years, this is the global arbitrage and leveling he was talking about. Apparently he was told not to talk about it anymore. This may last a generation, but there is nothing you can do about it. Americans have no special privilege on this earth to have their labor valued higher than a chinaman. We will have some suffering. We will hopefully come through this ok with a greater world GDP for everyone, but there is nothing that can be done to stop it, armchair anarchists notwithstanding. And for those of you who threaten violence against your perceived "enemies" you are just blowing smoke. We know who owns all the real weapons and it is not your poseurs and armchair anarchists that frequent this site. None of you have the balls to take up arms against the status quo, and in the USA at least in the South we will not tolerate molotov and snooker ball throwers. You will be shot by the police.
christ, you are a sanctimounious douchenozzle. put down the crack pipe gal.
I get it now, you're drunk. And early.
You better take a Pamprin, drink a Manhattan, and put some Vagisil on that sore and yeasty vagina, Tiny Dickus.
Wow, excellent way to visualize the numbers. It's disturbing to say the least.
That tax graph is crazy. How can republicans be whining about tax rates going
up for the rich in light of that trend?
These graphics remind me of something....graphs I saw in my econ classes about
income inequality in 'third-world' countries. Looks like that's what we are
becoming, what other conclusion can be drawn?
global economic convergence is not a pretty sight. At least not until it is through. But nothing can be done to stop it. Let us at least try to smooth out the rough edges.
Uh... little dicky
Fatalism: Perhaps you could ask the Chicoms if they would like to keep New York as the toilet paper capital of the world ?
"Looks like that's what we are becoming"? ROFL
We *became* a Banana Republic Kleptocracy a long time ago...
There is a solution, but there aren't enough *men* to pull it off.
SFishy - another number ("disturbing" to some whackos) to visualize is that the top 10% pay 70% of federal income taxes and the bottom 50% pay less than 3% of the federal income taxes.
So your friends in Washington DC are trying hard to redistribute towards equal outcomes for all - what other conclusion can be drawn? Don't lose that well founded hope you have in Washington - they really care about you.
Good god. This must have been picked up by LATOC. IS that the rock where some of you people have crawled out from? Hey I hear the owner is now totally into astrology. Maybe you should follow his new site also!
Sale on mountain house food! You better leave this website and check out the sale! This is supposed to be an investors site, not a site for the crazies and the angry.
Member 1 week 21 hours...
http://www.zerohedge.com/users/biggus-dickus-jr
After watching the Main Event Texas hold em poker tournment in Las Vegas this year, it got me thinking about game theory.
If we play the game long enough, whether we play the socialist game or the free-market capitalist game, someone always ends up with all the chips.
According the Pareto Law 20% vs 80%, but 2% vs 98% will not happen
JPM + GS = ?%
Buy the fucking dip !
Too much taxation, too much regulation, too much "I know what's best for you, and I'm going to make sure you get it".....
We are over-governed, and under-free. If I could have invested my SS contributions in ANYTHING else over the last three decades, I wouldn't be this poor. If my tax rates had been lower when I was making some money, I wouldn't be sweating retirement (some day, please Lord!) now.
It took a recession and unemployment to help me see, but I have (sort of) a plan now. I don't know if it'll survive the coming Crunch or not, but at least it's a plan; if I have to improvise a way past a desperate government confiscating all wealth in sight and outlawing every reasonable way to make a living, I'll do that too. My family isn't quitters; my wife beat cancer a couple of years back, I'm still busy now and not unemployed (at the moment), and whatever it takes to beat off these Infinite Governmenters is what I'll do. I'd like to do it in America, but even that's negotiable....
its easy to blame the rich, but im pretty sure its more simple than that. It's pretty much the results of compound interest and critical mass. The rich are able to accumulate wealth faster than inflation can eat it up. The "masses" dont have that luxury.
Interesting, and similar to the game theory post above. You're definitely right about compound interest and inflation.
you are right and that is why a jubilee was necessary every fifty years or so. Success and free markets eventually lead to serdom if allowed to run to their conclusion. Ironic that free markets eventually result in loss of freedom after a few hundred years?
Bullshit.
Jubilees were created because most of the debt was owed to the STATE.
!
the rich make money by being insiders or being connected with insiders. They don't make massive amounts of money with money sitting in simple interest bearing accounts
Elooie
Yeah, and if you lost $100 billion and your pal at the Bernank Bank printed you a replacement #100 billion, then you could accumulate faster, too.
This economic mess has nothing to do with the "rich" and the "poor" and everything to do with criminals and those on the take vs. those that are forced to carry the load for their crimes.
And WTC7 pulled itself.
The high interest rate regime of Volcker combined with the explosion of all kinds of debt created a bloated financial sector which sucked up a disproportionate slice of the new debt money.
So if we start out with $100 in wealth and you have $60 and I have $40. then we add $200 to the system and you get $175 of that and I get $25. Your slice goes from 60% to near 80% and mine from 40% to near 20%. We both have more (nominal) money but my share is smaller (and with inflation my real wealth may have declined).
I've lived the last 25 years on the opportunities created in the financial sector and am one who started on the lower end of the chain and worked hard and long in the financial game. But that doesn't mean my work made a great social contribution any more than service in an unjust war, however heroic, benefits society at large.
On the one hand, without property rights there is no meaningful freedom (Bastiat) and I'd like to keep mine, thanks. On the other hand, and as a matter of fact, extreme concentrations of wealth create social instability. And there's not much meaningful freedom in the fascist police state that evolves to protect that concentrated wealth.
No answers here, just some late Friday thoughts.
Nice to see moderate and thoughtful replies.
I appreciate your honest perspective. Cheers.
Well, we can't tax the top 1% and the bottom 90% got so little, comrade, so we'll have to take yours. Consider it God's work. /sarcasm
You can only take so much from the food stamp crowd. The truly wealthy are going to have to go after the bourgeois wealth to get their usury paid. There isn’t going to be enough future production to pay for all the future claims on wealth. Not everyone is going to get paid back the promises that are embedded in their excel spreadsheets.
DR
Well Said
The Law by Frederic Bastiat
A must read.
i can no longer tell the difference between democrats and republicans OR public employees and the rich
the difference is the rhetoric, all the actions and attitudes are the same
I AM BIGGUS DICKUS (but they call me junior). I thought I was through wanking but I got a second wind. It's been fun to wank with the latoc and mountain house crowd. And remember. My mommy told me never to fight the fed! Go long! Stay strong! but carry a tight stop.
and yes I can be a biggus dickus when I have to be, or just want to be! Traders take the world as it is. Also a good trader takes losses early and often. If we are going into a proto fascist feudalistic world then I want to be a rentier rather than a rantier. Save the ranting about inequality for someone who cares.
I junk myself again and it feels so good!
Cartoon US policy, forgotten social norms, spoon fed, worried, chalk faced, breadwinners. No questions asked, just he said she said, same, but what do you expect from the lazy nation out the Atlantic?
What's In Kanye West's Backpack?/When Will the Working America Unite?
http://lhmarketwatch.blogspot.com/2010/12/whats-in-kanyes-back-packwhen-...
you all love the little cartoons! did you ever ask yourself who makes them? how come there are no cartoons about all our media (main and most alternative) owned and run by jews, all big banks owned and run by jews? very strange? it tells you who makes all those cartoons and what is the goal behind all those well made and well funded cartoons! just maybe to draw your attention to just anything except the most important cartoon of all, that the jews own you!!!
All people of all religions have some influence. You want to focus on one unit of culture, without focusing on any other?
OK, sweeetie! Make a cartoon about the life and death importance of the information content people get from the main and alternative media and then spend all the time you want to discuss religious/ethnical diversity of its media owners, then do the same with the banking system which runs every single aspect of life on the planet. Then we will see how your little cartoon will handle these subjects!!!!!
Yes, Al jazeera, BBC, New Straights Times, RT, La Republique, the list of jewish owned media is endless.
Same for banks. Mitsubishi UFJ Financial, Industrial and Commercial Bank of China, Mizuho Financial Group, Bank of China, Sumitomo Mitsui Financial Group, Royal Bank of Canada, National Australia Bank, the list of jewish owned banks is endless.
The logic, Jews own (all) banks and newspapers therefor they are the ones who make (all) internet cartoons is also self evident.
My bank is owned by Taoist Chinese, my boss is buddhist Thai and dog is animist. I had no idea they were really jewish until I read your post. Thank you for your valuable contribution to Zero Hedge readers. We are in your debt.
nice
i made a couple of those cartoons. i'm not a jew, i'm a german.
fucker.
JUNKED.
Does income disparity really drive civil unrest? Deprivation, sure, but disparity in income?
They got nothing owning me. My value is not in having, but in Being. Cant take that
The propaganda / cartoon in the OP neglects an important point: people don't stay in a single economic segment. In fact, most of the people in the lower segments steadily move to higher ones.
Fomenting a class war is going to backfire, big time. If the people with the top 1% of incomes in the US were to stop earning, taxes for everyone else would have to increase by 60% to make up the difference. With only 1.4M people in the top 1% and up to 3M people moving overseas each year, that top 1% could disappear much sooner than anyone expects.
"The propaganda / cartoon in the OP neglects an important point: people don't stay in a single economic segment. In fact, most of the people in the lower segments steadily move to higher ones"
That was true once, but there is a large and growing number of people moving to lower segments due primarily to offshoring of well paid manufacturing, IT and professional jobs to lower wage countries. Many of these folks are in their forties and fifties and some are basically unemployable in our current economy. (ie they are willing to work at half their former salary or even at entry level wages but no one will hire them.)
I agree class warfare will do more harm than good. Treating financial and government criminals like ordinary criminals might forestall it some. But this new downwardly mobile group could start something (violent or not) in a year or two as their numbers increase and their situations deteriorate. Guess we'll see.
Any violence will be trivial disorganized and misdirected. Disenfranchised don't make good soldiers but they make great mass murderers.
"Any violence will be trivial disorganized and misdirected." just like your comments! Keep coming back.
There has been some of that.... as some that are "near the edge" lose their remaining sanity with their livelihood. Not what i meant.
Some, who retain their sanity and civility, will go to America's foundations for inspiration. For one example:
Governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed... Whenever government becomes destructive to life, liberty, or property [i.e., the pursuit of happiness], it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it... It is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security."
— American Declaration of Independence (1776)
That sounds revolutionary, but violence is not likely now, as these folks still have (diminishing) resources, and they are not violent by nature. It is more likely that seperate movements for each perceived ill will gain strength first. Movements (for nullification, hard money, simple taxes, deregulation, "freedom to farm", "return to the constitution" etc.) are likely to be explicitly nonviolent when formed. If meaningfull change cannot be achieved or violence is used against peacefull movements, they might then coalese and redirect their efforts.
As for soldiers, there is a large pool of veterans, and current military might become available about the same time, if funding for the wars becomes difficult.
What was the income distribution in the usa in 1860? how about 1760? I am sure it was much more skewed than it is now. Life goes on, there will be always rich and poor, their must be "rich" for someone to be "poor" real wealth is not income, anyway.
It was actually much more skewed in the later part of the 19th century. I believe I read that 80 percent of the assets were owned by one percent of the population.
Watched the vid. As simplistic as it was, I don't think 90% of Americans could comprehend it. As for those who ask what is wrong -- here's my answer. We don't have liberties or free enterprise in this country anymore. If you want to understand more of what I'm talking about, you can read James Burnham's The Managerial Revolution. There are too many control freaks and intermediaries in our lives. The most obvious examples of these intermediaries are the vast governmental and legal network that suffocates commerce and the central bankers that siphon the wealth from the citizens. Once we remove these yokes, we will have greater income equality. I do, however, think the removal of the yoke will be violent.
In order to save this market & society, we may need to push a few individuals in front of the line. Lead by example I say. Sometimes setting a global example has its setbacks.
Ted Turner; Global Warming Will Create Cannibals
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DSlB1nW4S54
Bill Gates on Population Control and Family Size
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=llAG5V7x17A
Need some help on understanding this (not the best thread to put this in, but...) I am reading in WSJ and Forbes today that the proposed tax cuts will change the GIFT TAX law in 2011 and 2012, so that there is a 5 million dollar amount allowed, before taxes. They are making comments like " in this two year period, wealthy folks can pass their estates down to their children untaxed. One of the articles states, however, that the 13,000 annual gift limit/per recipient, will remain. I understand that this has not been made into law yet - but- if any of you at Zerohedge have any expertise in this area, could you discuss what this may mean. I would greatly appreciate it. Here is what I would like to figure out: My mother is worth just under 5 million, and she is elderly; her estate will go down to her four children, and there are five grandchildren - what will this law mean to this estate? Given the uncertain nature of what will happen in the future, as far as re-instating a higher estate tax- say in 2014, HOW can we use the possible new GIFT TAX chnages to maximize the amount that comes down to us? Thanks for advice.
“Socialism works only until you run out of other people’s money.”
-Margaret Thatcher
Tick, tick, tick kaboooom
MTKnife - First, you should get competent tax advice (which will not be found on this site and will cost, but is well worth it). Go to a tax CPA at one of the bigger firms in your town (not necessarily the biggest) and they can figure out the best plan for you. With this kind of money, there is no reason not to spend a few dollars on good advice.
Warning: in doing so you will be viewed as "evil" on this site as you seek to minimize what someone with $5 million hands over to the government as you look for "loopholes" to "exploit" the "average working man" from "their fair share" of government gruel. But my advice is to please go figure out how little you can hand over to the government (they actually already have lots of money, they just do not know how to budget or use it well). Well done by your grandparents.
Thanks, Bob. I will continue to read up on the subject, and contact a good CPA/Tax lawyer. Yup, and I agree, asking Tax Loophole questions on this thread - is about the same as driving in to Juarez in a clearly marked DEA van.
I love the varying view points on ZH. If you can't hear the other side's argument, you aren't open to learning anything. When I do inherit a million from my mother, I am going to cash it into singles, and head to a Dallas Strip Club, and just feed the dancers, and smoke crack until they carry me out on a stretcher. Enron Style. I can boil all this argument about Socialism and Social Darwinism, to one long night of pounding lights, big bass music, and gyrating hips. Drive It Like You Stole It.
Bob - I agree on the competent tax advice. I disagree that people on this site would generally consider this 'evil'. I think most ppl on this site lean libertarian or at the very least anti-government (both in taxes and hand-outs). Using a simple exclusion is hardly aggressive tax planning. And a $5 million estate tax exclusion probably helps a fair number of people on this site (with their pm's, houses, etc.). I wouldn't paint such a broad brush about the denizens around here... :)
Most on this site seem to have a presumption that anyone with $5 million or $500 million has obtained it through some ill-gotten, exploitive route. And lots of pro-union, anti-corporate types which is not consistent with right-leaning folks.
I do not think most folks on this site will need a seven digit estate tax exclusion, so they view the $5 million exemption as robbing the government, not fair, etc.
Mac - pm me and I will give you the best advice you'd ever want.
However, remember that the client any CPA or Estate Planning Attorney will be seeing is YOUR MOTHER (her wishes and desires, made independently of her children), and not you or your siblings, and that the best investment someone in your mother's position could make is COMPETENT (this is not common at all) professional advice.
And no - keeping as much money your mother has accrued, WHICH SHE HAS ALREADY PAID MULTIPLE LEVELS OF TAXES ON, including income, dividend, consumption, property, etc., out of government coffers is not a bad thing by any stretch.
Expert estate planners often cite two things to high net worth clients: If you don't plan intelligently, as little as 10 cents on each dollar you ACCRUE will make it to your heirs, and in the context of family (closely) held businesses, 90% never successfully transition to the 2nd generation, and less than 2% successfully transition to the 3rd generation, and a big part of the reason is the 'Death Tax' (that's what it is, in reality).
Funny how it is now more noble to be a poor bum than to be rich and productive to society and pay for the bums.
Channeling Marxist ideology and projecting Utopian mysticism and ideals of what our condition should be is futile and anti-Darwin.
Level the playing field so the Central Bankers don't really run the country and we will achieve great things.
Ben Franklin and the Colonials did fantastic on their own until the Central Bankers stepped on their necks.
The bankers to Franklin, "What do you do in the colonies with all your poor"?
He replied, "We have no poor, everyone is prosperous." They were astonished and in disbelief. He explained how they used colonial script and how it was valued by the Colonialists and how it created jobs and prosperity for all.
The Bank of England immediately put a stop to it. They banned script and imposed unfair taxes and regulations. Within 3 years there was indolence, unemployment, high taxes, and a ruined economy. The war was really about the war against the central bank.
The mainstream thinks Andrew Jackson was a freak for what he said about central banking. I have more and more respect for the man except for his ethnic cleansing.
ZH posters, today was a monumental example of a US president who lacks power. Allow me to shed light.. Our current President couldn't explain the importance of a global mission. Slick Willy is well versed on the subject of Global Citizenship. Have a watch.
President Bill Clinton - Global Citizenship: Turning Good Intentions into Positive Action
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D_UTMFQRiOo
How does this fit into the thread subject matter, you have to understand the layers of the onion. We live in a very exciting time.
On a comedy note.. Enjoy the comic strip
TGIW – Obamas #101 – Revoltin’ DevelopmentThe Clinton Foundation, Wallymart, Chinese contributions.
The 3 ingredients to concoct Outsourcing of American jobs.
This rotten buncha graphs remind me of Mark Twain:
"There are three kinds of lies. Lies, damned lies, and statistics."