Should US wealth be redistributed?

[VJW]

Re: Should US wealth be redistributed?

This isn't for you or I to decide though VJW.

Never claimed it was. I see you’re still leaping to conclusions, eh ?

The question was, can you justify it ?

Stop worrying about what other people are getting paid and focus on what you're doing with your life

I’m not “worrying about what other people are getting paid”, I’m concerned about anti-democratic oligarchies and corporate states. Concentrations of wealth at the top have proven not to be beneficial to societies.

#

[VJW]

Re: Should US wealth be redistributed?

I don't agree with that, they're independent.

Who’s “independent” ?

The only redistribution that I see is middle-class/working poor "wealth" heading over seas through the trade deficit, not up the ladder as you suggest.

I don’t “suggest” it, all of the Census data, IRS data, and Labor Department data states it HAS. The Rich got richer, the Middle-class and Working Poor got poorer.

#

[VJW]

Re: Should US wealth be redistributed?

Just a guess. Maybe there are fewer people capable of doing it in the US?

Based upon WHAT evidence ?

The CEO situation is probably not all that different than pro athletes. Why do they get paid what they get paid? Because they are worth it.

The evidence of CEO performance versus pay indicates otherwise.

As I posted earlier in this thread, this is just one article that makes that case:

CEO Pay 'Business As Usual'

Among companies where pay and stock performance diverged:

* Cincinnati-based Fifth Third Bancorp's shares lost 20% and earnings fell 12%. But CEO George Schaefer received an $825,000 bonus after directors used their "best business judgment" analyzing measures such as the economy, his progress on regulatory matters and leadership objectives, according to its proxy. Schaefer also got options worth up to $17 million and gained $9 million exercising options.

* Anheuser-Busch shares have been as flat as day-old beer since Patrick Stokes became CEO in July 2002. In setting Stokes' 2004 salary - up 5% to $1.5 million. Since 2002, Stokes has received options potentially worth $290 million.

* Merck shares sank 30% after the company pulled its profitable Vioxx pain reliever off the market Sept. 30 because of safety concerns. Directors conceded that operating results were below target but gave Ray Gilmartin a $1.4 million bonus after deciding that he'd met his "personal performance objectives." Gilmartin also received options that Merck's proxy says are valued at $19.2 million. He also pocketed $34.8 million exercising options.

* Eli Lilly's shares slumped 19% in 2004, but CEO Sidney Taurel's combined salary, bonus and stock grant surged 74% to $4.6 million. Lilly directors also concluded that Taurel's compensation was "significantly" below that of his peers, giving him 400,000 options the company valued at about $11 million, vs. 2003's 350,000 option grant worth $7.2 million.

#

[cercis]

Re: Should US wealth be redistributed?

I’m not “worrying about what other people are getting paid”, I’m concerned about anti-democratic oligarchies and corporate states. Concentrations of wealth at the top have proven not to be beneficial to societies.

Indeed, it's one of the main causes of revolutions. At the present rate in the US, we're heading for a class revolution within the next generation. In some sense it's already happening.

[dealsaver]

Re: Should US wealth be redistributed?

Poverty now comes with a color TV

[Optsol]

Re: Should US wealth be redistributed?

Who’s “independent” ?

I don’t “suggest” it, all of the Census data, IRS data, and Labor Department data states it HAS. The Rich got richer, the Middle-class and Working Poor got poorer.

#

You completely missed my point.

Census data does not show the direct transfer of wealth from the poor to the rich. It simply shows the poor getting poorer, and the rich getting richer.

You are suggesting that they are correlated. I do not beleive that the wealth lost from the poor transfers up the ladder to the wealthy. That suggestion implies that middle class and working poor people only spend their wealth on goods and services from rich people within this country. Obviously, that is not true.

[VJW]

Re: Should US wealth be redistributed?

You completely missed my point.

Census data does not show the direct transfer of wealth from the poor to the rich. It simply shows the poor getting poorer, and the rich getting richer.

A) It involves a lot more than just “Census data”.

B) It is as a DIRECT result of a change in public policy. It was not Kawinkydink.

You are suggesting that they are correlated.

As Tweety Bird would say, “THEY ARE ! THEY ARE !”.

I do not beleive that the wealth lost from the poor transfers up the ladder to the wealthy.

You “believe” incorrectly.

That suggestion implies that middle class and working poor people only spend their wealth on goods and services from rich people within this country.

No it does not.

That’s a faulty assumption.

#

[Optsol]

Re: Should US wealth be redistributed?

<shrug>

Parse all you wish. You can not demonstrate (aside from a tweety bird) that wealth is transferring up the ladder.

Middle class/working poor wealth is being transferred overseas through the trade deficit -- it has little to do with the rich people within this country.

Best wishes

[VJW]

Re: Should US wealth be redistributed?

Parse all you wish.

I stated it flat out.

You can not demonstrate (aside from a tweety bird) that wealth is transferring up the ladder.

But the Census Bureau, the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the Department of Labor, the Congressional Budget Office, and the Internal Revenue Service, all disagree with you.

Back in 1976, the WEALTHIEST ONE PERCENT of Americans owned NINETEEN PERCENT of all the private wealth in the country. Recently, that same WEALTHIEST ONE PERCENT of Americans owns MORE THAN FORTY PERCENT of all the private wealth in the country. Their share of the nation’s wealth now exceeds the wealth owned by all of the bottom 92% of the U.S. population, COMBINED.

Middle class/working poor wealth is being transferred overseas through the trade deficit -- it has little to do with the rich people within this country.

There is no evidence to support that unsubstantiated belief.

#

[Optsol]

Re: Should US wealth be redistributed?

But the Census Bureau, the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the Department of Labor, the Congressional Budget Office, and the Internal Revenue Service, all disagree with you.

Back in 1976, the WEALTHIEST ONE PERCENT of Americans owned NINETEEN PERCENT of all the private wealth in the country. Recently, that same WEALTHIEST ONE PERCENT of Americans owns MORE THAN FORTY PERCENT of all the private wealth in the country. Their share of the nation’s wealth now exceeds the wealth owned by all of the bottom 92% of the U.S. population, COMBINED.
#

That only shows that the wealthiest 1% know how to invest well.

You show no correlation between the middle class losing wealth directly to the wealthiest 1%.

[jmjj215]

Re: Should US wealth be redistributed?

Interesting article dealsaver. Thanks

[VJW]

Re: Should US wealth be redistributed?

That only shows that the wealthiest 1% know how to invest well.

It had nothing to do with investing.

You show no correlation between the middle class losing wealth directly to the wealthiest 1%.

You "show no correlation between" "how to invest well" and "the wealthiest 1%".

#

[Optsol]

Re: Should US wealth be redistributed?

It had nothing to do with investing.

: It didn't have anything to do with the working poor or middle class either.

You "show no correlation between" "how to invest well" and "the wealthiest 1%".

And you still show no correlation between the middle class losing wealth directly to the wealthiest 1%. :

[VJW]

Re: Should US wealth be redistributed?

It didn't have anything to do with the working poor or middle class either.

Of course it did.

And you still show no correlation between the middle class losing wealth directly to the wealthiest 1%.

Just as ONE example:

The 1991 GREEN BOOK study (which examined federal personal income taxes, federal corporate income taxes, and federal excise taxes) concluded that, adjusted for inflation, pretax incomes stagnated or fell for most segments of the population between 1980 and 1990, while the wealthiest one percent enjoyed HUGE increases in income.

The policy of cutting taxes on the Rich & Corporate even as their incomes skyrocketed, while increasing taxes on the rest of the taxpayers, made the shift of after-tax income from the Working Poor and Middle-class to the wealthy even more pronounced:

For the Middle-income and Lower-income families, in the first three-fifths percentile of the income scale, after-tax incomes DECLINED between 1980 and 1990. The after-tax incomes of the families in the fourth twenty percent of the income scale grew by only one percent over the same time period. However, the after-tax income of the wealthiest one percent of the population rocketed by a STAGGERING 136 PERCENT.

[1991 GREEN BOOK, House Committee on Ways and Means. May 7th, 1991, page 1306]

#

[Optsol]

Re: Should US wealth be redistributed?

Edit to change :
Same as the other thread...
I'm done; complete waste of time.