Home Mail MemberMap Chat (0) Wallpapers
Go Back   ChiefsPlanet > The Royal Lounge > D.C.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 01-30-2014, 11:29 AM  
Prison Bitch Prison Bitch is offline
FAUX-HAWKS for all!
 
Prison Bitch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Lees summit
Casino cash: $14437
If we want more income equality.....

If we want more income equality, should we return to the economy of George W. Bush?
BY JIM LINDGREN
January 28 at 5:41 am

More



Other things being equal, income equality is better than inequality. But other things are NOT equal. The easiest way to make incomes more equal in the short run is to have a recession.

Much has been made of growing income inequality since 1979, but very little attention has been paid to which of the four presidental administrations preceding Barack Obama increased income equality and which ones reduced it. In short, the two presidents whose terms involved improving income equality were the two George Bushes and the two whose terms were associated with worsening after-tax income equality were Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton. It is probably not an accident that the two presidents in whose administrations the GDP grew the most were the two presidents whose time in office coincided with worsening income equality.

The president under whom the poorest quintile enjoyed the largest increase in after-tax household income was George W. Bush. And the two administrations under whom the richest quintile and richest 1 percent fared the worst were the two Presidents Bush. Among Barack Obama’s four immediate predecessors, the two biggest income equalizers were George H.W. Bush and George W. Bush.

Just to be clear, I am not pining for the good old days of the economy of George W. Bush.


But George W. Bush was the most successful of our recent past presidents in achieving very substantial increases in incomes for the poorest quintile (+18.4%), while keeping gains for the richest quintile and richest 1 percent at modest levels. For example, under Bush the Younger, the incomes of the richest 1 percent rose only 6.5 percent in eight years, compared to a staggering 84 percent under Clinton and 91 percent under Reagan.
If you would rather have Bill Clinton’s economy than George W. Bush’s economy – and I definitely would – then as a practical matter you probably don’t care overmuch about income equality.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/v...george-w-bush/
Posts: 14,590
Prison Bitch 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.Prison Bitch 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.Prison Bitch 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.Prison Bitch 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.Prison Bitch 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.Prison Bitch 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.Prison Bitch 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.Prison Bitch 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.Prison Bitch 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.Prison Bitch 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.Prison Bitch 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2014, 12:59 PM   #16
cosmo20002 cosmo20002 is offline
Debunking your bullshit
 
cosmo20002's Avatar
 

Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: KC area
Casino cash: $14390
Quote:
Originally Posted by patteeu View Post
I don't think anyone has said that's the goal. Why do you ask?
Because the term "income equality" implies that incomes should be equal. I'm asking because I want to understand the outrage that seems to be brewing. Are we talking about an "equal pay for equal work" principle or a "everyone should make the same amount no matter what" principle?

I have a feeling that "equal pay" is a label being put on something Obama may have said and it doesn't really reflect what he was actually saying. Just asking for some clarification--
__________________
Posts: 19,239
cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2014, 01:01 PM   #17
patteeu patteeu is offline
The 23rd Pillar
 
patteeu's Avatar
 

Join Date: Sep 2002
Casino cash: $5000
Quote:
Originally Posted by cosmo20002 View Post
Because the term "income equality" implies that incomes should be equal. I'm asking because I want to understand the outrage that seems to be brewing. Are we talking about an "equal pay for equal work" principle or a "everyone should make the same amount no matter what" principle?

I have a feeling that "equal pay" is a label being put on something Obama may have said and it doesn't really reflect what he was actually saying. Just asking for some clarification--
Obama talked about "equal pay" in the context of his deceitful commentary about a gender gap in wages.

Income equality is more about the left's class warfare demagoguery than their gender warfare demagoguery.
__________________


"I'll see you guys in New York." ISIS Caliph Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi to US military personnel upon his release from US custody at Camp Bucca in Iraq during Obama's first year in office.
Posts: 75,744
patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2014, 01:02 PM   #18
KC native KC native is offline
a toda madre o un desmadre
 
KC native's Avatar
 

Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Fort Worth, TX
Casino cash: $11250
Quote:
Originally Posted by patteeu View Post
The article explained all of this, minus the unimportant details that you've added.
No, the article didn't explain this. He just went over the contemporaneous statistics with zero context. He offers no explanations as to why the statistics came across as they did.

Not surprised that you think the actual causes are unimportant details.
__________________
The diameter of your knowledge is the circumference of your actions. Ras Kass

Quote:
Originally Posted by Iowanian View Post
I'm just a little pussy from Iowa
Posts: 18,043
KC native is too fat/Omaha.KC native is too fat/Omaha.KC native is too fat/Omaha.KC native is too fat/Omaha.KC native is too fat/Omaha.KC native is too fat/Omaha.KC native is too fat/Omaha.KC native is too fat/Omaha.KC native is too fat/Omaha.KC native is too fat/Omaha.KC native is too fat/Omaha.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2014, 01:07 PM   #19
patteeu patteeu is offline
The 23rd Pillar
 
patteeu's Avatar
 

Join Date: Sep 2002
Casino cash: $5000
Quote:
Originally Posted by KC native View Post
No, the article didn't explain this. He just went over the contemporaneous statistics with zero context. He offers no explanations as to why the statistics came across as they did.

Not surprised that you think the actual causes are unimportant details.
The very first paragraph says it all. "The easiest way to make incomes more equal in the short run is to have a recession." Anyone with any sense at all can see that this article is saying that income inequality has increased more rapidly in our highest growth economies (Reagan and Clinton) and it's increased less rapidly or decreased when our economy has experienced a recession (Bush and Bush).

I don't think it matters whether the recession was caused by the dot com bubble. That's an unimportant detail.
__________________


"I'll see you guys in New York." ISIS Caliph Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi to US military personnel upon his release from US custody at Camp Bucca in Iraq during Obama's first year in office.
Posts: 75,744
patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2014, 01:09 PM   #20
blaise blaise is offline
MVP
 

Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Plano, TX
Casino cash: $1170
Quote:
Originally Posted by cosmo20002 View Post
Is "income equality" supposed to mean that everyone makes the same amount of money, period? Has anyone said that is actually the goal?
I don't really understand the relevance of your question to my quoted post.

If you want to make a point feel free to do so on your own.
Posts: 20,831
blaise is obviously part of the inner Circle.blaise is obviously part of the inner Circle.blaise is obviously part of the inner Circle.blaise is obviously part of the inner Circle.blaise is obviously part of the inner Circle.blaise is obviously part of the inner Circle.blaise is obviously part of the inner Circle.blaise is obviously part of the inner Circle.blaise is obviously part of the inner Circle.blaise is obviously part of the inner Circle.blaise is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2014, 01:09 PM   #21
cosmo20002 cosmo20002 is offline
Debunking your bullshit
 
cosmo20002's Avatar
 

Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: KC area
Casino cash: $14390
Quote:
Originally Posted by patteeu View Post
Obama talked about "equal pay" in the context of his deceitful commentary about a gender gap in wages.

Income equality is more about the left's class warfare demagoguery than their gender warfare demagoguery.
But who is using the phrase "income equality" in that context? Sounds to me like right-wing demagoguery about the disappearing middle class and how the left's goal is that everyone has the same income.
__________________
Posts: 19,239
cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2014, 01:12 PM   #22
cosmo20002 cosmo20002 is offline
Debunking your bullshit
 
cosmo20002's Avatar
 

Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: KC area
Casino cash: $14390
Quote:
Originally Posted by blaise View Post
I don't really understand the relevance of your question to my quoted post.

If you want to make a point feel free to do so on your own.
Before I can make a point, I need to know what's being discussed. What does this alleged goal of "income equality" mean? That everyone makes the same income? And who is allegedly stating that this is a goal?
__________________
Posts: 19,239
cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2014, 01:13 PM   #23
KC native KC native is offline
a toda madre o un desmadre
 
KC native's Avatar
 

Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Fort Worth, TX
Casino cash: $11250
Quote:
Originally Posted by patteeu View Post
The very first paragraph says it all. "The easiest way to make incomes more equal in the short run is to have a recession." Anyone with any sense at all can see that this article is saying that income inequality has increased more rapidly in our highest growth economies (Reagan and Clinton) and it's increased less rapidly or decreased when our economy has experienced a recession (Bush and Bush).

I don't think it matters whether the recession was caused by the dot com bubble. That's an unimportant detail.
...I wasn't talking about the cause of the recessions. Your clueless act is becoming as annoying as BEP's anecdotes.
__________________
The diameter of your knowledge is the circumference of your actions. Ras Kass

Quote:
Originally Posted by Iowanian View Post
I'm just a little pussy from Iowa
Posts: 18,043
KC native is too fat/Omaha.KC native is too fat/Omaha.KC native is too fat/Omaha.KC native is too fat/Omaha.KC native is too fat/Omaha.KC native is too fat/Omaha.KC native is too fat/Omaha.KC native is too fat/Omaha.KC native is too fat/Omaha.KC native is too fat/Omaha.KC native is too fat/Omaha.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2014, 01:14 PM   #24
patteeu patteeu is offline
The 23rd Pillar
 
patteeu's Avatar
 

Join Date: Sep 2002
Casino cash: $5000
Quote:
Originally Posted by cosmo20002 View Post
But who is using the phrase "income equality" in that context? Sounds to me like right-wing demagoguery about the disappearing middle class and how the left's goal is that everyone has the same income.
OK, I see what you're focused like a laser beam on. It should be "income inequality". Better?

I look forward to the next time you complain about me being a stickler for definitions or allegedly feigning ignorance.
__________________


"I'll see you guys in New York." ISIS Caliph Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi to US military personnel upon his release from US custody at Camp Bucca in Iraq during Obama's first year in office.
Posts: 75,744
patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2014, 01:16 PM   #25
blaise blaise is offline
MVP
 

Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Plano, TX
Casino cash: $1170
Quote:
Originally Posted by cosmo20002 View Post
Before I can make a point, I need to know what's being discussed. What does this alleged goal of "income equality" mean? That everyone makes the same income? And who is allegedly stating that this is a goal?
I don't know. Ask the democrats that are using income inequality as a campaign issue what the end goal is.
Posts: 20,831
blaise is obviously part of the inner Circle.blaise is obviously part of the inner Circle.blaise is obviously part of the inner Circle.blaise is obviously part of the inner Circle.blaise is obviously part of the inner Circle.blaise is obviously part of the inner Circle.blaise is obviously part of the inner Circle.blaise is obviously part of the inner Circle.blaise is obviously part of the inner Circle.blaise is obviously part of the inner Circle.blaise is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2014, 01:18 PM   #26
blaise blaise is offline
MVP
 

Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Plano, TX
Casino cash: $1170
Quote:
Originally Posted by cosmo20002 View Post
But who is using the phrase "income equality" in that context? Sounds to me like right-wing demagoguery about the disappearing middle class and how the left's goal is that everyone has the same income.
Right, it's the right wing using income inquality as demagoguery.

Obviously.
Posts: 20,831
blaise is obviously part of the inner Circle.blaise is obviously part of the inner Circle.blaise is obviously part of the inner Circle.blaise is obviously part of the inner Circle.blaise is obviously part of the inner Circle.blaise is obviously part of the inner Circle.blaise is obviously part of the inner Circle.blaise is obviously part of the inner Circle.blaise is obviously part of the inner Circle.blaise is obviously part of the inner Circle.blaise is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2014, 01:21 PM   #27
cosmo20002 cosmo20002 is offline
Debunking your bullshit
 
cosmo20002's Avatar
 

Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: KC area
Casino cash: $14390
Quote:
Originally Posted by patteeu View Post
OK, I see what you're focused like a laser beam on. It should be "income inequality". Better?

I look forward to the next time you complain about me being a stickler for definitions or allegedly feigning ignorance.
No, not better. Still implies that everything should be equal.

It seems like (and I'm open to correction on this) the right is trying to stick this "income equality" label on the left so they can use it for their "Ds are evil socialists" narrative. I've asked several times--who is using this "income equality" term? Who is saying it is a goal? Is anyone saying that everyone's income should be equal?
__________________
Posts: 19,239
cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2014, 01:23 PM   #28
cosmo20002 cosmo20002 is offline
Debunking your bullshit
 
cosmo20002's Avatar
 

Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: KC area
Casino cash: $14390
Quote:
Originally Posted by blaise View Post
I don't know. Ask the democrats that are using income inequality as a campaign issue what the end goal is.
If a D is using the term "income equality" as a goal, they are pretty stupid.
__________________
Posts: 19,239
cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2014, 01:23 PM   #29
blaise blaise is offline
MVP
 

Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Plano, TX
Casino cash: $1170
Quote:
Originally Posted by cosmo20002 View Post
No, not better. Still implies that everything should be equal.

It seems like (and I'm open to correction on this) the right is trying to stick this "income equality" label on the left so they can use it for their "Ds are evil socialists" narrative. I've asked several times--who is using this "income equality" term? Who is saying it is a goal? Is anyone saying that everyone's income should be equal?
Income inequality is at crisis levels.
Posts: 20,831
blaise is obviously part of the inner Circle.blaise is obviously part of the inner Circle.blaise is obviously part of the inner Circle.blaise is obviously part of the inner Circle.blaise is obviously part of the inner Circle.blaise is obviously part of the inner Circle.blaise is obviously part of the inner Circle.blaise is obviously part of the inner Circle.blaise is obviously part of the inner Circle.blaise is obviously part of the inner Circle.blaise is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2014, 01:24 PM   #30
blaise blaise is offline
MVP
 

Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Plano, TX
Casino cash: $1170
Quote:
Originally Posted by cosmo20002 View Post
If a D is using the term "income equality" as a goal, they are pretty stupid.
Income inequality is probably the biggest issue facing our nation right now.
Posts: 20,831
blaise is obviously part of the inner Circle.blaise is obviously part of the inner Circle.blaise is obviously part of the inner Circle.blaise is obviously part of the inner Circle.blaise is obviously part of the inner Circle.blaise is obviously part of the inner Circle.blaise is obviously part of the inner Circle.blaise is obviously part of the inner Circle.blaise is obviously part of the inner Circle.blaise is obviously part of the inner Circle.blaise is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:41 AM.


This is a test for a client's site.
A new website that shows member-created construction site listings that need fill or have excess fill. Dirt Monkey @ https://DirtMonkey.net
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.