Nobody ever doubted that objectively low iq/edu dunning kruger posterkids always think they're right.
What can I say, it's entertaining to watch Intellectuals deal with the realization that the people theythoughtbelieve weren't as smart as them were actually in fact right, and, are laughing at their stupidity. Billy Bob appreciates your mental discomfort, as do I...
Nobody ever doubted that objectively low iq/edu dunning kruger posterkids always think they're right.
So you've realized you're less smart than Billy Bob...good, good...
No, Billy Bob and most of the conservatives are about as smart as you, which rather explains why they agree on most everything.
So you still haven't realized it yet? O'Bummer, well, in time you'll get it...lol...
No, your lot are just objectively low iq/edu, and thus feel the need to maximize benefits of white ethnicity. If you weren't, perhaps you wouldn't have to whine about living in a low rent neighborhood all the time.
Whatever you need to tell yourself Fail, lol! Interesting though that the reason the neighborhood has gone downhill is because of...wait...could AgentFail be wrong? No! It must be for some other reason, any other reason...lol...oh Fail!
No, it's just empirically you determined fact that low edu white folks tend to agree with you about all them minorities.
Who knew all these Blacks here were low edu white folks?! Jesus something must be wrong with my eyes! LOL, when even the people you are concerned about don't agree with you...hahahahaha....
If they did why weren't they voting for the guy pandering to racists by talking shit about minorities?
Who knows, I'm not Black, I can't tell you why they didn't vote for Trump. Then again, they didn't turn up to vote for Billary like they did for Bummer. I wonder if that's because they're racist, misogynst, both, or, they just couldn't stomach to vote for Billary as many others couldn't? Why don't you ask them Fail, maybe they'll tell ya...haha...
Odd given your sort have being going on about what blacks think or should think since the slaving days.
Yikes, no ideas on why...not surprised but I expected mor...well, OK, no I didn't...haha...
Let's not pretend your lot agree with the liberals about segregation or slavery.
Please, we still have segregation, it's called high housing prices and property taxes. You know, what the well off liberals practice, the well off Blacks, etc. (see how much you walk into your own fail)? As for slavery, WTF, we haven't had slavery in like...forever? Unless you're taking about slavery of property tax due to sweetheart public sector union deals with Democrats? Oh sorry, the IL thread is that way...
You made claims about social programs, like SNAP, not being for poor people. I've shown that people who qualify for programs like SNAP must be at the defined poverty level or below. So you really haven't shown anything repeatedly, despite your insistence otherwise.
And dodge the rest. I expected you to do that. Despite all of your bitching about the rich, you can't actually point out how they are screwing people over. When you can provide something with any real substance to substantiate your claims, please do. Until then...I'll be waiting.
EITC & ACA "subsidies" are both tax-based. They aren't handouts for poverty level citizens, like SNAP is.I also offered that EITC & ACA subsidies aren't just for poor people at all. ACA subsidies reach even further up into the middle class than EITC. You've been trying hard to ignore that.
Social welfare spending also extends to housing subsidies for low income families, grants for school lunch programs, senior centers & so on.
I already showed how the radical shift of national income to the top negatively affects the lower 75% back at #756. Since 1980, their share of national income fell by 25% as the 1% share more than doubled. It's math. It's just business, nothing personal. Our way of dealing with technological progress has clearly favored the 1%, the ownership class. That's obvious & undeniable.
Nearly 40 years of trickle down economics have simply failed to deliver to most Americans. It has not performed as advertised. You need to include that truth in how you think things should be.
Despite this, the study argues that more redistribution won’t fix the problem.
Because the labor income of the bottom 50 percent of Americans has weakened so drastically, Mr. Piketty, Mr. Saez and Mr. Zucman write, “there are clear limits to what redistributive policies can achieve.”
They argue that future policy should focus more on raising the primary income of the American working class. Possibilities include improving education and job training, equalizing distribution of human and financial capital, and increasing labor bargaining power, combined with a return to steeply progressive taxation.
Did you not know this already? Maybe that's why I yawn when you post in here...or maybe it is due to other factors?"A yawn is a reflex consisting of the simultaneous inhalation of air and the stretching of the eardrums, followed by an exhalation of breath. Yawning (oscitation) most often occurs in adults immediately before and after sleep, during tedious activities and as a result of its contagious quality."
Please, we still have segregation, it's called high housing prices and property taxes. You know, what the well off liberals practice, the well off Blacks, etc. (see how much you walk into your own fail)? As for slavery, WTF, we haven't had slavery in like...forever? Unless you're taking about slavery of property tax due to sweetheart public sector union deals with Democrats? Oh sorry, the IL thread is that way...
EITC & ACA "subsidies" are both tax-based. They aren't handouts for poverty level citizens, like SNAP is.
And you mention housing subsidies, school lunch grants, and senior programs. Despite these programs people still remain poor.
And according to the NT Times, the lower 50% of national income share rose by 2.6% since the mid-70s. They also argued that:
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive...findings-about-income-inequality-piketty.html
The big change in income has been due to technology, specifically computer technology. It might seem like it has been a long time since computers changed everything, but in economic impact years it is still in its infancy.
Those who failed to adapt to changing times and still lived in a manufacturing world lost out. Eventually those people will die off and the newer generations that have embraced tech will once again narrow that income gap. We aren't seeing a trend, we are looking at a shift in how the economy functions and an economic evolutionary lag before the economy re-normalizes.
The average pretax earnings of an American in the bottom 50 percent by income was $16,197 in 2014, a nearly invisible 2.6 percent gain over 40 years. Over the same period, the top 10 percent of Americans saw their pretax incomes grow by 231 percent.
Forty years ago, the top 1 percent of earners took home 10.5 percent of the total national income, and the bottom half earned 20 percent of it. By 2014, those percentages effectively flipped, with the top 1 percent earning a 20 percent share and the bottom half dropping to 12.5 percent.
Its called 50% of all available jobs are $15/hr or less. In other words, poverty level jobs. America is increasingly a second tier nation. The blame for this rampantly obvious. It has to do with a tiny sector of the population purchasing our political system and perverting in a such a way that all the profits of labor go to the wealthy. I am encouraging my kids to move out of this shithole of a country. It is past redemption. There are about a dozen beautiful SOCIALIST nations that are doing a world better than here in every meaningful category and where the labor force has an actual future. America is headed towards anarchy and civil war... is is just about done.
https://thejobgap.org/job-gap-2015-low-wage-nation/2015-low-wage-nation-national-findings/
email the NY Times and inform them of their mistake. Lay the smack-down on them, Jhhnn. Do let everyone in here know how that goes.That's not share of income at all. It's actual dollar income. $16K would obviously go a lot further 40 years ago than it does today.
Your linked article merely confirms what I've been saying & you apparently don't even realize it.
You mean our economy hasn't changed from a manufacturing economy to a tech economy? And all is lost?Your whole "failed to adapt" schtick is entirely self serving. Computers & automation have meant fewer jobs to accomplish the same amount of production & distribution. It's not like there's unlimited real demand to make up the difference.
Your last paragraph is pure Pollyanna pablum. If we just look away it'll all get better eventually, right?
email the NY Times and inform them of their mistake. Lay the smack-down on them, Jhhnn. Do let everyone in here know how that goes.
You mean our economy hasn't changed from a manufacturing economy to a tech economy? And all is lost?
Well let's kick back and see who is wrong about that, Jhhnn.
My bet isn't on you.
The NY Times makes a claim that opposes your claims. Try to avoid that all you want but the facts remain that you are blowing a bunch of smoke up everyone's collective butt,I don't think writing the NYT to tell them that you're so opinionated that you can't understand that article will make any difference.
Of course you have.I've acknowledged changes to the economy throughout the thread, so, uhh, nice straw man anyway.
Tech economy? Ha!email the NY Times and inform them of their mistake. Lay the smack-down on them, Jhhnn. Do let everyone in here know how that goes.
You mean our economy hasn't changed from a manufacturing economy to a tech economy? And all is lost?
Well let's kick back and see who is wrong about that, Jhhnn.
My bet isn't on you.