Author Topic: A Progressive Principle: Economic Inequality  (Read 4314 times)

roo_ster

  • Kakistocracy--It's What's For Dinner.
  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 21,225
  • Hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats
A Progressive Principle: Economic Inequality
« on: November 29, 2007, 12:58:12 PM »
For context, the following is a tangent from this:
http://www.armedpolitesociety.com/index.php?topic=9671.0

The immediate context:
http://www.armedpolitesociety.com/index.php?topic=9671.msg165167#msg165167
http://www.armedpolitesociety.com/index.php?topic=9671.msg165289#msg165289



Quote
LA isn't first-world anymore, either, demographically.
Bo-ring.

Quote
We can't get engineers with upper middle class incomes to move to LA to do much-needed work due to the cost of non-crime-ridden housing.
What you mean to say is that engineers with 'upper middle class' incomes can't live the lifestyle they're accustomed to in LA, because real estate prices are nuts.
Economic Inequality.  (EI)

(Cherry) Pick your measure(1): income, earnings, wealth, whatever.  EI is supposed to be something progressives/liberals/leftists(2) are against and work to minimize.  According to the left, EI is A Very Bad Thing.  Usually visions of pore, starvin' workers are described, along with cant such as, "The rich are getting richer while the poor are getting poorer."

Imagine my surprise when I pointed out to a self-described liberal that LA, over the last couple of decades, has gone from a city with the usual spread of poor, middle, and affluent to third-world levels of economic bifurcation; the response was "Bo-ring." 

I got to wondering: Why did the left not worry that every time an illegal wades through the Rio Grande and reaches America, EI in America increases?



I thought of several possibilities.

Wishful Thinking:
The influx of illegals gives the left the America of its mind's eye.

America was not, is not, the Dickensian dystopia described by them.  A hale & hearty middle class made up the majority, with relatively small destitute and affluent classes.  Dumping illegals by the millions into America makes America more like what they think America is and meets their expectations.

Economic Self-Interest:
So many in the social work and other bureaucracies are employed to deal with the added burden to gov't & taxpayers, that a reduction in illegals means fewer social work jobs.

Mo' Illegals, Mo' Bettuh:
The constant influx of illegals allows the Spanish-speaking to maintain the critical mass of ethnicity to act as a barrier to assimilation into American society.  Since the most significant political organ of the left in America (Democratic Party) is a coalition of balkanized ethnic grievance groups, letting one of those groups assimilate means less political power for the left.

Doesn't Rate:
In the Hierarchy of Lefty Pieties, illegal immigrants rate higher than efforts to combat economic inequality.

Sometimes values can conflict.  Another example is milk for poor babies vs the environment.  The left makes much noise about poor families not being able to feed themselves.  It also squawks about the environment.  Well, this conflict comes down on the side of the environment and on the head of poor folks trying to feed their families.  Oxygenation mandates in fuels, restricting the use of certain chemicals in agriculture, and driving up the cost of fuel all demonstrate that the environment rates more than poor families' nutrition.

Bring It On!:
Will result in the "internal contradictions" of capitalism bringing its own collapse more quickly.

Some of the hardest of the hard left likely think that if they can make American reality into the nightmare described in their tracts, the Marxist apocalypse will be closer at hand.

The Solution to (White) Pollution Is Dilution:
It is more important to swamp the descendants of the evil, white, euro-centric, penis-people with the brown "masses" than to combat EI.

Since Western Civ is responsible for all evil in the world, the West was ethnically white/European, and America is too white anyway, it makes sense to dilute the whiteness of America by any means necessary.





What do you think?



(1) If you don't at least know the difference between wealth, income, and earnings, you need to get yourself some basic economics education.  If you don't know how they can be mis-used when debating policy and economics, you need some work, too.

(2) Referred to collectively in this post as "the left."  I know there is some sunlight between most contemporary liberals and hard lefties.
Regards,

roo_ster

“Fallacies do not cease to be fallacies because they become fashions.”
----G.K. Chesterton

drewtam

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1,985
Re: A Progressive Principle: Economic Inequality
« Reply #1 on: November 29, 2007, 02:26:48 PM »
I think its partly the "doesn't rate" analysis. But partly your premise. If you are looking at the world through class warfare, then all poor workers of the world are one class, and all rich capitalists of the world are another. So a poor worker crossing the border doesn't change the world EI. If anything it slightly reduces it because that poor worker now has a better life on this side of the border. Even if he is subject to abuse without the legal rights and protections of our legal immigrants.

Another extension of the one world class structure, is that en mass movement (large scale illegal immigration) of a poor class is always right. Because the "Worker's Party" is always on the side of the workers.
I’m not saying I invented the turtleneck. But I was the first person to realize its potential as a tactical garment. The tactical turtleneck! The… tactleneck!

Headless Thompson Gunner

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 8,517
Re: A Progressive Principle: Economic Inequality
« Reply #2 on: November 29, 2007, 02:41:49 PM »
The usual EI complaints are fundamentally irrational.  You can't expect to find a rational explanation for people believing irrational things.

wooderson

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1,399
Re: A Progressive Principle: Economic Inequality
« Reply #3 on: November 29, 2007, 03:27:43 PM »
Quote
Imagine my surprise when I pointed out to a self-described liberal
Strike one: I've never been a "self-described liberal."

Quote
that LA, over the last couple of decades, has gone from a city with the usual spread of poor, middle, and affluent to third-world levels of economic bifurcation; the response was "Bo-ring."
No, the part I called bo-ring was the usual - boring - whine that LA, that land of homos, atheists, Hollywood Communists and (most key to the usual whine) brown folks, is no longer part of the USA, but a 'third-world country' and 'occupied territory.'

Why did I call it boring? Because it's played out. Jeff Cooper tried running those lines for decades and it came off as tacky and semi-racist then.

And because LA actually isn't any different from other first-world metropolises, Paris, London, New York, San Francisco, et al. Urban centers with something approaching affordable real estate are not the norm in the first-world. In the US we're talking Chicago, Dallas, Houston - middle America, with room to spread. And the latter of those are cheap in part because they aren't 'destination' living.

And my latter response was serious - portraying LA's divide as "third-world" is just willfully misusing the word. Doesn't capitalism 101 teach us that scarce product with high demand (ie land and homes in ritzy areas) creates nutty prices (million-dollar cottages). And you still need a functioning economy, people to work in the absurdly overpriced areas, so there will be some cheap housing and it will not be nice.

Quote
I got to wondering: Why did the left not worry that every time an illegal wades through the Rio Grande and reaches America, EI in America increases?
This actually is a serious concern with "the left," particularly union organizers - with liberals, I dunno. Again, I ain't one.

The left is apprehensive of dealing with immigration because the debate inevitably is framed around demonizing the 'criminal' illegals who are here taking our jobs and pillaging our social welfare and etc. etc. etc.. Progressives and leftists, quite obviously, want no part of quasi-racist dogma, nor do they have any desire to punish people who merely wish to better their lives through labor.

Leftists focus on those who take advantage of illegal labor in order to drive down wages. That's why one element is often some kind of amnesty: because once people are free and clear to work here, they can join (as an example, and in LA this is a big issue, actually) custodial unions, rather than undercutting them.
"The famously genial grin turned into a rictus of senile fury: I was looking at a cruel and stupid lizard."

LAK

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 915
Re: A Progressive Principle: Economic Inequality
« Reply #4 on: December 01, 2007, 04:39:12 AM »
Don't you remember? ".. peace and prosperity in every land"?

Before the third worlders can be given a "fair slice" of the "free trade" leading to a supposed raising of their living standards, the economic playing field must first be level - our level brought down to their level average.

Yes; they really do want to "bring it on".

--------------------------------------

http://searchronpaul.com
http://ussliberty.org
http://ssunitedstates.org

MechAg94

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 33,726
Re: A Progressive Principle: Economic Inequality
« Reply #5 on: December 06, 2007, 09:20:16 AM »
I thought the property values in LA were due mostly to local and state laws and regulations, not illegals.  Houston has lots of illegals also, but the property values here are not as bad.  Houston just has no zoning laws and fewer restrictions on land use. 
“It is much more important to kill bad bills than to pass good ones.”  ― Calvin Coolidge

MechAg94

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 33,726
Re: A Progressive Principle: Economic Inequality
« Reply #6 on: December 06, 2007, 09:25:36 AM »
As far as economic inequality:  IMO, the goal should be to remove barriers to economic advancement for individuals and small businesses.  If you are born poor, you don't have to live poor until you die.  You are free to put the work in to improve your life and that of your kids. 
“It is much more important to kill bad bills than to pass good ones.”  ― Calvin Coolidge

HankB

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 16,624
Re: A Progressive Principle: Economic Inequality
« Reply #7 on: December 06, 2007, 10:37:14 AM »
The problem with those who complain about "economic inequality" is that their "solutions" will normally result in universal misery.
Trump won in 2016. Democrats haven't been so offended since Republicans came along and freed their slaves.
Sometimes I wonder if the world is being run by smart people who are putting us on, or by imbeciles who really mean it. - Mark Twain
Government is a broker in pillage, and every election is a sort of advance auction in stolen goods. - H.L. Mencken
Patriotism is supporting your country all the time, and your government when it deserves it. - Mark Twain

K Frame

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 44,249
  • I Am Inimical
Re: A Progressive Principle: Economic Inequality
« Reply #8 on: December 06, 2007, 11:08:51 AM »
Ah, plans to "solve" the economic inequity "problem."

When someone with a gun tries it, it's called a crime.

When someone else tries it, it's called "progressive social engineering."

At least the guy with the gun is being honest in his intentions.
Carbon Monoxide, sucking the life out of idiots, 'tards, and fools since man tamed fire.

Paddy

  • Guest
Re: A Progressive Principle: Economic Inequality
« Reply #9 on: December 06, 2007, 12:05:55 PM »
Corporate owned government, not 'welfare', is the reason for the increasing IE we're experiencing.  There has been a continuing income shift, as a percentage of GDP, from salaries and wages to corporate profits since 1970.  The variance is now in the neighborhood of $1 trillion+ per year. In 1970, salaries and wages constituted 53% of GDP.  By 2006, that number was down to 45%, a decline of 8%.  Eac % point equals about $132 billion.  That's over a trillion $ a year in IE due to corporate dominance.  And with it goes the middle class.

Corporations are accomplishing this ripoff by way of offshoring, outsourcing, reneging on pension obligations, decreasing employee health coverage, and a dozen other ways.

The 'welfare' argument is just so much red herring pap to keep your eye off the real culprits.


HankB

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 16,624
Re: A Progressive Principle: Economic Inequality
« Reply #10 on: December 07, 2007, 09:22:12 AM »
Corporate owned government, not 'welfare', is the reason for the increasing IE we're experiencing. 
According to my personal budget, I'll pay more in taxes (Federal, State, and Local) than I have on food, clothing, shelter, and transportation combined during 2007.

I don't see government providing me with services in proportion to the taxes I'm paying, so that means they're using my money to provide someone else with services.

That's welfare.
Trump won in 2016. Democrats haven't been so offended since Republicans came along and freed their slaves.
Sometimes I wonder if the world is being run by smart people who are putting us on, or by imbeciles who really mean it. - Mark Twain
Government is a broker in pillage, and every election is a sort of advance auction in stolen goods. - H.L. Mencken
Patriotism is supporting your country all the time, and your government when it deserves it. - Mark Twain

Art Eatman

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1,442
Re: A Progressive Principle: Economic Inequality
« Reply #11 on: December 07, 2007, 10:07:38 AM »
It has been some forty years since I began reading that we were ending the Industrial Age in the U.S. and the Information Age was beginning.  Some folks just don't pay attention.  The commentary did not stop, so all I can figure is that some folks are just slow learners.

These recent decades have seen a shift in the makeup of corporate profits.  They have changed to where some 50% of all corporate profits have been financial, not from heavy industry.

IOW, the game changed.  All games have rules.  A halfway smart person learns them and uses them to his benefit.  If corporate profits are going up, buy stock in those corporations which are growing.  Shun those which are not.  If US companies are losing, buy into foreign companies which are gaining.

Nobody who's relied solely on wages has ever gotten wealthy.  Can't happen.  The tax laws have always prevented that.  Wealth accumulates to those who are smart enough to do some variant of the better-mousetrap thing.  Or who have not spent their disposable income on frou-frou but have invested toward the future.  Planned ahead, instead of wanting instant gratification or worried about "kewl".
The American Indians learned what happens when you don't control immigration.

Paddy

  • Guest
Re: A Progressive Principle: Economic Inequality
« Reply #12 on: December 07, 2007, 02:22:48 PM »
Anyone who is still paying attention will see that not only are corporate profits 'going up', but so are corporate retained earnings.  That is corporate income that is not not spent on capital investment, not paid out in wages and salaries, not otherwise used for operations, and not distributed as dividends to shareholders.  Add to that the portion of corporate income and capital gains from foreign operations that is held/diverted offshore to avoid U.S. income tax, and the result is that you're not likely to get 'wealthy' from investments, either.

This country, this government is supposed to be 'of, by and for' the people.  That means government has a duty to protect its citizens from any form of tyranny, including exploitation of labor, and theft of labor's fruits, by capital.  Our country was built by and with a combination of labor and capital.  There is no purpose of one without the other. 

Economic inequality is not a 'progressive' principle, it is a neo-conservative principle, as I've already explained.   The so-called 'game' has become a stacked deck that is literally destroying the middle class, all with government complicity.  It's time the common man took his country back from the 21st century robber barons.  History does repeat itself.

geronimotwo

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 3,796
Re: A Progressive Principle: Economic Inequality
« Reply #13 on: December 07, 2007, 04:20:57 PM »
Quote
Anyone who is still paying attention will see that not only are corporate profits 'going up', but so are corporate retained earnings.



where would one go to find sources to research this?
make the world idiot proof.....and you will have a world full of idiots. -g2

Paddy

  • Guest
Re: A Progressive Principle: Economic Inequality
« Reply #14 on: December 07, 2007, 07:34:41 PM »
It's not real easy to dig out.  Mostly it comes from an aggregate of academic papers supported with expensive research purchased from data collection sources such as Global Financial Data and others.  The distillations are then published in various scholarly works such as:

Dean Baker, 2007, The Productivity to Paycheck Gap: What the Data Show, Center for Economic and Policy Research.

Paul Krugman, 2007, The Conscience of a Liberal.

Frank Levy and Peter Temin, 2007, Inequality and Institutions in 20th century America, Working Paper 01-17, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Thomas Picketty and Emmanuel Saez, 2001, Income Inequality in the United States, Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol 116, No. 4 (Nov), pp 1493-1525.

Jack Rasmus "The Trillion Dollar Income Shift" 2007

Also, you can verify much of this data referencing the copious bibliographies in books such as "War on the Middle Class" by Lou Dobbs, "Screwed" and "Unequal Protection" by Thom Hartmann to name three.

Art Eatman

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1,442
Re: A Progressive Principle: Economic Inequality
« Reply #15 on: December 10, 2007, 08:44:27 AM »
Corporate profits may not be invested all that much in the U.S., these days, in part because it's not all that profitable to do so in a contracting economy.  Home Depot, for instance, ain't investing in new stuff.  But there is sure some investment in foreign markets--because many of those are expanding markets.  GM and Coca Cola are increasing investments in China.

The trouble with these comments about corporations is that they tend to be grand, sweeping and all-inclusive generalizations.  Corporations here which are in growth conditions are indeed investing in efforts for expansion.

One problem in analyzing all this stuff is the difficulty of translating into constant-dollar terms.  All I've read shows that just as with the buying power of the middle class, corporate profits have been in decline.  I'm talking long-term trends, now, not any one- or three-year period. 
The American Indians learned what happens when you don't control immigration.

CAnnoneer

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2,136
Re: A Progressive Principle: Economic Inequality
« Reply #16 on: December 10, 2007, 09:25:19 AM »
I would like to hear a rational explanation as to why corporate profits (per se) are bad for America. Arguments like: "Them CEOs are making too much. We should redistribute for fairness" is what I usually get from leftists. Which makes me ask 'fairness to whom?" Interestingly, the same thinkers got no problem with sportsmen or entertainers making millions, because "they are talented so it is ok". Somehow leading a Fortune 500 company to even more prosperity is thought to have nothing to do with talent or ability.

Frankly, it goes back to what leftist-loathed Newt Gingrich has to say about "a culture of ownership". If you are an owner working hard to get ahead in the world, you don't tend to complain about "them rich bastards". I wonder why.

wooderson

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1,399
Re: A Progressive Principle: Economic Inequality
« Reply #17 on: December 10, 2007, 09:42:29 AM »
How many fields of hay do you have to harvest to build your strawmen?
"The famously genial grin turned into a rictus of senile fury: I was looking at a cruel and stupid lizard."

CAnnoneer

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2,136
Re: A Progressive Principle: Economic Inequality
« Reply #18 on: December 10, 2007, 11:15:42 AM »
How many fields of hay do you have to harvest to build your strawmen?

That is non-responsive. Please formulate a counterargument.

wooderson

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1,399
Re: A Progressive Principle: Economic Inequality
« Reply #19 on: December 10, 2007, 11:19:52 AM »
Hard to "formulate a counterargument" to stereotypes and strawmen. Duh.
"The famously genial grin turned into a rictus of senile fury: I was looking at a cruel and stupid lizard."

Headless Thompson Gunner

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 8,517
Re: A Progressive Principle: Economic Inequality
« Reply #20 on: December 10, 2007, 02:01:20 PM »
Another non-response...

Why is profit so terribly bad for America?

I'd like to hear both you and Riley deliver a sensible answer to that question.

Otherguy Overby

  • friend
  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 256
Re: A Progressive Principle: Economic Inequality
« Reply #21 on: December 10, 2007, 02:12:05 PM »
Quote
Posted by: MechAg94
I thought the property values in LA were due mostly to local and state laws and regulations, not illegals.  Houston has lots of illegals also, but the property values here are not as bad.  Houston just has no zoning laws and fewer restrictions on land use.

Sorry Grasshopper, the property values in LA are only indirectly related to laws and regulations.  IOW, the commies have yet to take over everything there yet.  They are trying, though.  The housing prices are directly reflected by availability of financing and perception of market value. 

I could buy back in there now with my inside access and probably make good money but I'm getting to be an old guy and I don't need it, anymore, and it is work.  Besides, the rules have changed and I've not bothered to figure them out.
Guns
Motorcycles
Jeeps
Never enough!

wooderson

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1,399
Re: A Progressive Principle: Economic Inequality
« Reply #22 on: December 10, 2007, 03:24:10 PM »
Quote
Why is profit so terribly bad for America?


"The famously genial grin turned into a rictus of senile fury: I was looking at a cruel and stupid lizard."