1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out....

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by poindexter, Jan 27, 2014.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Page 17 of 17
  1. doctorquant

    doctorquant Well-Known Member

    Following up just to provide some support to your assertion that the inequality message is resonating.

    When recently asked to name the biggest problem facing America, the proportion of those polled who tabbed inequality (i.e., those who share President Obama in seeing it* as "the defining challenge of our time") was ...

    4 percent**

    http://www.gallup.com/poll/166844/government-itself-cited-top-problem.aspx

    *I don't really think the President -- and the distinguished Senator from Massachusetts and the honorable Mayor of NYC -- see it that way.

    **Margin of error +/- 4%.
     
    doctorquant, Feb 11, 2014
    #193
  2. 93Devil

    93Devil Well-Known Member

    If your average post is 300 words, this was 640 words, that means you have written over 5.25 million words on this site.

    The entire Lord of the Rings series has about 500,000 words.
     
    93Devil, Feb 11, 2014
    #194
  3. The Big Ragu

    The Big Ragu Moderator Staff Member

    The world economy is doomed either way, cran. Things are going to have to get worse before they get better. All of the debt the world has built up has to reconcile itself, and the way every developed world central bank has tried to put off dealing with that problem, has to get to that currency crisis to allow that to happen.

    Central bank manipulation (and we're talking about the Fed, although this could be the BOJ or the People's Bank of China, which has a shadow bank crisis brewing right now) is the only thing propping up our economy -- we are seeing anemic growth half of what it should be at this point in a recovery. Job growth is miserable and even with the bullshit numbers BLS cranks, the last two months have been particularly miserable.

    Peter was saying over and again that the Fed wouldn't pull back because without the monetary shenanigans interest rates are going up and things are going to fall apart.

    Before you get all gleeful over the fact that the Fed started to taper (He was wrong! Ah ha, they tapered -- which misses the point), why not wait and see if the REASON he said that it wouldn't is correct?

    They backed themselves into a corner. They could push themselves farther toward insolvency (This is the Federal Reserve we are talking about. How did it get there?!?!?) or they could start to pull the life support plug. He figured they would choose the blinders / insolvency approach.

    As I said, if we are not back in a recession (in which case he was right) by the time they get to zero -- or they have not reversed course (what will happen) by increasing asset purchases well above where they are now, or more likely they move on from QE3 (just as they did from QE1 to QE2 and QE2 to QE3) to a new rigging scheme (reverse repos, perhaps), then maybe he was wrong about the monetary heroin keeping the US economy on life support.

    He wasn't. But even if you don't get it, why not at least wait to see if what he is suggesting comes true before trying to go "a ha."

    Who gives a shit if they started to taper? The thing of real consequence is what happens as a result.
     
    The Big Ragu, Feb 11, 2014
    #195
  4. cranberry

    cranberry Well-Known Member

    Yes, a lot of people named the economy in general (18 pct.), unemployment/jobs (16 pct.), lack of money (4 pct.) and, of course, poverty, hunger and homelessness (4 pct.) -- issues that fold very neatly under inequality.
     
    cranberry, Feb 11, 2014
    #196
  5. doctorquant

    doctorquant Well-Known Member

    LOL and SMH ... keep fightin' the good fight my man.
     
    doctorquant, Feb 11, 2014
    #197
  6. cranberry

    cranberry Well-Known Member

    LOL.
    LOL. Make a point.
     
    cranberry, Feb 11, 2014
    #198
  7. LongTimeListener

    LongTimeListener Well-Known Member

    dq, if Americans don't think inequality is a problem, that's also largely because they don't know the level to which it exists.

    This set of charts ...

    http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2011/02/income-inequality-in-america-chart-graph

    became this video ...

    http://billmoyers.com/2013/03/06/income-inequality-goes-viral/

    showing that most Americans think the top 20 percent earn about 60 percent of the income, and the next 20 percent earn about 20 percent, etc. etc. They would like it to be more evenly spread out, but given their perceptions they don't see it as the biggest issue. (As a side note, I would say "biggest issue" is one of those loaded questions because, if you think it's the #2 issue but overall debt is the #1 issue, your belief about income inequality is invisible in that survey.)

    In reality the top quintile has more than 80 percent of the income, while the next quintile gets 10-15 percent more. The bottom 60 percent of the country splits about 5 percent of the nation's total income.

    So, to your link, the facts forming the opinions are very wrong.
     
    LongTimeListener, Feb 11, 2014
    #199
  8. Point of Order

    Point of Order Active Member

    I like the phrase "a boon to Big Food."
     
    Point of Order, Feb 11, 2014
    #200
  9. old_tony

    old_tony Well-Known Member

    Wanting to emulate the rich is what made this a great country. Wanting to bring the rich down is what's destroying this country. The income gap always seems to grow under redistributionists like Obama, and the idiot poor always seem to lap up falling further behind. And then they keep voting against their own interests.
     
    old_tony, Feb 12, 2014
    #201
  10. Baron Scicluna

    Baron Scicluna Well-Known Member

    Actually, according to this guy, middle class real incomes grow twice as fast and poor incomes grow six times as fast under Democratic presidents (pre-Obama) than they do Republican ones.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/27/magazine/27wwln-idealab-t.html?_r=0

    So no, the idiot poor do not fall further behind under the redistributionists, at least from what this guy writes. They actually get ahead.

    And wanting an income to be able to pay your bills, put money away for emergencies and retirement, and have enough left over to enjoy a vacation once a year out of the two weeks that companies are so generously giving you is hardly wanting to emulate the rich.
     
    Baron Scicluna, Feb 12, 2014
    #202
  11. old_tony

    old_tony Well-Known Member

    Nothing quite so equal as your heroes in the White House throwing lavish parties (How about Michelle's $12,000 dress? Wasn't she just ravishing?) and then having him lecture the next day about income equality.
     
    old_tony, Feb 12, 2014
    #203
  12. Baron Scicluna

    Baron Scicluna Well-Known Member

    Every president, Democratic or Republican, has hosted state dinners. And if Michelle had worn something cheap, their critics would then be saying she was embarrassing the country for not wearing something more fancier.
     
    Baron Scicluna, Feb 12, 2014
    #204
Page 17 of 17
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page