The Costa Citationair

[*#$% Headwinds]

In that case, x-rated's post was also out of context. Please call him on that. It doesn't change my point one iota. Concentrating wealth from 12% to 44% over 30 years, even in NYC is effing insane! Did four times as many highly paid professionals move into the city as lived there in 1980 while the population of fast food workers remained stagnant? Not likely!

 

[gret]

"The United States is a plutocracy, with an income and wealth distribution that rivals South America’s worst cases, but economists refuse to acknowledge that these outcomes are attributable to ill-advised public policies on taxation, regulation, trade, and education spending over the last several decades."

Read more: http://www.forbes.com/sites/leesheppard/2012/05/03/economists-malign-influence-on-taxes/

Yea Forbes, definaty Forbes.

Come on...tricks are for kids. Lee Sheppard is known for outrageous comments to promote herself and her column in a monthly newsletter. The quote above is hers and she doesn't provide any facts backing up the statement.

 

[gret]

It appears there is a lot of dancing about wealth. I don't begrudge anybody that has been successful financially, but it appears that others resent this passionately.

To cut to the chase, what do the the critics suggest happen to rectify the perceived injustice and how would this help private aviation?

 

[*#$% Headwinds]

It's certainly not about resenting success. It's about success at the expense of those who work hard for a living and see stagnant or shrinking real income. The successful are earning much of that increasing wealth by reducing the wages of workers. It's no different from resenting welfare recipients except, welfare recipients are less damaging to the middle class than anti-worker, trickle-down policies of the conservative movement.

 

[X-rated]

In that case, x-rated's post was also out of context. Please call him on that. It doesn't change my point one iota. Concentrating wealth from 12% to 44% over 30 years, even in NYC is effing insane!

How is what I wrote out of context? I didn't offer any commentary other than Praetorian made up the 93 percent of all income number, and then I quoted the text that specifically refuted his claim. It doesn't matter what he may have "heard" from unreliable extremest left wing talking heads. They either don't know what their talking about, or more likely, are purposely lying in an effort rile up the sheep. The actual data from the IRS is 17 percent. If he would have said 20 percent, I wouldn't have called him on it, but 93 percent is a ridiculous and a intentionally misleading inaccuracy.

 

[Sparse]

It's certainly not about resenting success. It's about success at the expense of those who work hard for a living and see stagnant or shrinking real income. The successful are earning much of that increasing wealth by reducing the wages of workers. It's no different from resenting welfare recipients except, welfare recipients are less damaging to the middle class than anti-worker, trickle-down policies of the conservative movement.

I have to ask if you could offer up a solution. If the rich are forcing wages and benefits down what would be the outcome of taxing them more? Would that not encourage them to reduce wages or benefits further? Is it possible that downward pressure on wages is a result of the rich being subjected to higher cost not caused by taxes but by the cost of increased regulations? Could it be because of American's desire for more and cheaper goods? Conservatives, like me realize we, as a society, need a safety net. We also realize there will always be the poor, the bible tells us that. The question is of fairness. The president uses that phrase often. Maybe you could define that.

 

[*#$% Headwinds]

x-rated: that's fine. My post was no more out of context.

Listen, I can dig up numbers all day to demonstrate my point, and even Forbes ("Average America vs the 1%", 3/21/12) has said it is a transference of wealth from the many to the few. The reality is that most industries are less regulated now due to heavy lobbying than since the early days of the industrial revolution. I propose that the downward pressure on wages is due to little more than abject greed, which the bible tells me is a sin.

 

[*#$% Headwinds]

My solution? The middle class are the backbone of this country and account for far more economic activity than the richest few. Yes, keep middle class taxes low, that money will go directly into the economy. Most of the economic activity is people buying necessities. Food, daily needs goods etc. If you made $1,000,000/yr, would you buy 10 times as much toilet paper, food, clothes, cars, etc as someone earning $100,000? Would you spend all that money hiring someone to make a product when there is no demand because the middle class no longer has disposable income? The only way to grow this economy out of its depths, is to empower the middle class. Help raise wages. There are many ways of doing that. Ending the trickle down policies are a good start.

 

[gret]

How do you raise wages for the middle class? Does Congress pass a law ordering it? The question is serious as I simply don't know how you snap you fingers and increase compensation.

Isn't the right answer to increase disposable income of the middle class by reducing taxes and government spending? Income taxes are just a small part of the equation for most people...the taxes for cellphones, land lines, utilities, fuels, transportation, liquor, and tobacco are crazy at the Federal level and impact the middle class on many cases more than any tax on income.

Take a look at the NBAA constant fight over user fees...the industry doesn't want to pay them, but in fact, the tax would be levied on those users who can most afford it. Instead, we currently have the majority of the burden on the people flying commercial who mostly belong to the middle class.

 

[*#$% Headwinds]

Gret, do you accept that wages have been depressed for the past 30 years? OK. There is no snapping your fingers but to undo the damage you must undo the policies that suppressed wages. Weakening unions is undoubtedly the biggest contributor to suppressed wages. Also, returning the highest tax brackets to Clinton levels or higher will put that money back in the economy instead of languishing in hidden accounts. The infrastructure of this country is in dire need of repair, that means more jobs, which means more economic activity and greater competition for workers which gets higher wages. There is no one answer, there has to be many!