Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Tuesday, December 12, 2017

For nearly half of American millennials, the American dream is dead, according to the results of a new national poll from Harvard's Institute of Politics released Thursday. Among those aged 18 to 29, 48 percent said it was "dead," and 49 percent said it was "alive." Among supporters of Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders, however, majorities of 61 percent and 56 percent said it was decidedly dead. College graduates were more likely to say it was still "alive" for them (58 percent), to just 42 percent of non-college graduates who said the same thing. About 56 percent overall expressed a desire for the Democrats to maintain control of the White House, in line with the 55 percent who responded that way in the institute's spring survey. By contrast, just 36 percent said they wanted to see a Republican as the next president, a decrease of 4 points from April.

Advertisement

Advertisement

More

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

Three things ...

1) I agree with Millennials given the fact that after 8 years of listening to Republicans and conservatives complain about Obama and tbe deficit ... only to see these same people increase the deficit with tax cuts paid for by working and middle-class Americans, free taxpayer money given to corporations who are already making record profits ... it's no wonder these Millennials think the way they do ...

2) any day we can post the above George Carlin video is a good day ... if only to remind everyone why things are the way they are ...

3) the Bernie Sanders video is testament to why he's the most popular politician in America ... and what Bernie is saying (and has always been saying) dovetails nicely with the truths George Carlin talked about.

#1 | Posted by PinchALoaf at 2017-12-12 08:57 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

And Rs will make sure they drive a stake through the heart of that dream.

#2 | Posted by SomebodyElse at 2017-12-12 09:00 AM | Reply

It's been dead for decades now. Long before these whipper snappers were even a gleam in their mother's eye.

#3 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2017-12-12 09:16 AM | Reply

Of course it's dead.

The GOP took it back behind the barn and shot it along with America itself.

#4 | Posted by jpw at 2017-12-12 09:33 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Wages flat-lined 40 years ago, but we never hear our elected leaders (Bernie being the exception) talk about practical matters like working and middle-class Americans needing a pay raise.

Millennials growing up seeing their parents struggle to make ends meet has obviously left a lasting impression.

#5 | Posted by PinchALoaf at 2017-12-12 09:47 AM | Reply

WTF do they know......... Most of them can't even tell you who the US got their freedom from.

#6 | Posted by Sniper at 2017-12-12 06:51 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Most of them can't even tell you who the US got their freedom from.

God?

#7 | Posted by ClownShack at 2017-12-12 06:53 PM | Reply

WTF do they know......... Most of them can't even tell you who the US got their freedom from.

#6 | POSTED BY SNIPER AT 2017-12-12 06:51 PM | FLAG:

Do you really want to make knowledge the standard by which to judge people? Doesn't that sort of work against you?

#8 | Posted by DirkStruan at 2017-12-12 06:59 PM | Reply

So it appears most of you agree with them (millennials).

When has any generation when they were young believed the American Dream (whatever that is) was alive?

What do the millennials define as the American Dream?

Many of you pissed your pants over trump chanting "make America great again ". Why? It begs the question what does "great" mean? Or when was it great?

Regardless of where you stand on this issue, I can promise you this ... Millennials will have to figure out their own dream. Nobody's going to do it for them

#9 | Posted by eberly at 2017-12-12 07:12 PM | Reply

Many of you pissed your pants over trump chanting "make America great again". Why?

#9 | POSTED BY EBERLY

Because it sounds like something Hitler would've said, that's why.

Not hard.

#10 | Posted by PinchALoaf at 2017-12-12 08:02 PM | Reply

Advertisement

Advertisement

Hitler reference? Boring. It was a cheap campaign slogan. That's all.

And your beef was that you didn't know what it meant.

Nobody did.

Just like with millennials, as I already stated.

#11 | Posted by eberly at 2017-12-12 08:05 PM | Reply

Hitler reference? Boring. It was a cheap campaign slogan. That's all.

And your beef was that you didn't know what it meant.

Nobody did.

Just like with millennials, as I already stated.

#11 | POSTED BY EBERLY

Don't ever mistake me for a prim and proper intellectual egghead who is afraid of Godwins Law. Even Godwin admitted that in the age of Trump if the Hitler-sounding shoe fits, wear it.

Your problem is you're an American who doesn't understand the ramifications of Nationalism, let alone what fascism means.

Trump blabbering at Hitler-esque sounding slogans at campaign rallies are EXACTLY what they are, Hitler-esque sounding slogans.

Your glib-ness is laughable, in a not funny sort of way.

#12 | Posted by PinchALoaf at 2017-12-12 08:18 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

You can insult me for not pissing my pants over stuff like that.

I'm a realist who despises trump as much as the next guy.

But I won't join the "world is ending" club.

I've got better things to do. Apparently many here don't.

#13 | Posted by eberly at 2017-12-12 08:33 PM | Reply

Roy Moore might win.

The " gloom and despair" Buffet starts soon. You don't want to lose your place, Pinch.

#14 | Posted by eberly at 2017-12-12 08:35 PM | Reply

Reaganomics stole prosperity from the future to make the 80s seem awesome. Blow up the deficit to make it rain for the rich.

Now the bill is coming due and repubs want to double down on the trickle down idiocy.

#15 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2017-12-12 08:45 PM | Reply

I'm a realist who despises trump as much as the next guy.

But I won't join the "world is ending" club.

I've got better things to do. Apparently many here don't.

#13 | Posted by eberly

Saying trump is no more concerning than any other crappy politician is an indictment of your own ignorance.

If you don't see the danger that a maniac in the oval office can create, or the destruction he's already causing, then you're not some calm and stable rational adult, you're an ignoramus with your head in the sand.

#16 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2017-12-12 08:48 PM | Reply

"Saying trump is no more concerning than any other crappy politician"

Where did I say that?

#17 | Posted by eberly at 2017-12-12 08:49 PM | Reply

You can insult me for not pissing my pants over stuff like that.

I'm a realist who despises trump as much as the next guy.

But I won't join the "world is ending" club.

I've got better things to do. Apparently many here don't.

#13 | POSTED BY EBERLY

The world did not end with Trump being elected president.

So while I agree with Millennials that the American Dream is dead, mostly because of wages being suppressed combined with regressive tax policies aimed against working and middle-class Americans ... I disagree with Millennials on their original apathy, they need to be pissed off BEFORE the election and they need to effing vote each and every election.

And being real is admitting that 4 decades worth of evidence shows that tax cuts do not pay for themselves, by the way.

#18 | Posted by PinchALoaf at 2017-12-12 08:50 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"The world did not end with Trump being elected president."

A little progress....but you're still in therapy I hope.

"So while I agree with Millennials that the American Dream is dead,"

Do you know what the American Dream is?

#19 | Posted by eberly at 2017-12-12 08:52 PM | Reply

Speaks,

Wake me up when Trump topples a government like the last administration or starts an unnecessary war like the one before that. I'm appalled and repulsed by his behavior but on the practical side he's no idealogue. He is easily distracted and the things he has the most wood for aren't dangerous.

#20 | Posted by JeffJ at 2017-12-12 08:54 PM | Reply

Roy Moore might win.

The " gloom and despair" Buffet starts soon. You don't want to lose your place, Pinch.

#14 | POSTED BY EBERLY

I'm guessing Roy Moore wins rather easily ... I hope I'm wrong, but I don't put past electing a racist child molester to the United States Senate past any blockheaded American voter.

#21 | Posted by PinchALoaf at 2017-12-12 08:55 PM | Reply

Do you know what the American Dream is?

#19 | POSTED BY EBERLY

What the American Dream is can be debated endlessly.

What the American Dream isn't is having to work 3 jobs to equal the same standard of living that past generations had -- Millennials clearly see this and have connected the dots.

#22 | Posted by PinchALoaf at 2017-12-12 08:59 PM | Reply

"Saying trump is no more concerning than any other crappy politician"

Where did I say that?

#17 | Posted by eberly

You didn't. But that's the implication when you mock those who are concerned as "the world is ending club."
You're implying there's nothing out of the normal to be concerned about.

#23 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2017-12-12 09:15 PM | Reply

Well, at least millenials still have the option of enlisting to become cannon fodder for the 1% and the MIC.

#24 | Posted by moder8 at 2017-12-12 09:16 PM | Reply

Speaks,

Wake me up when Trump topples a government like the last administration or starts an unnecessary war like the one before that. I'm appalled and repulsed by his behavior but on the practical side he's no idealogue. He is easily distracted and the things he has the most wood for aren't dangerous.

#20 | Posted by JeffJ

Nuclear brinksmanship isn't dangerous?

You must be radiation proof.

Environmental destruction isn't dangerous?

You must be a robot.

Ruining american's influence and reputation isn't dangerous?

YOu must be ignorant as hell.

#25 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2017-12-12 09:17 PM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 1

"You didn't. But that's the implication "

Exactly. You have to put words in my mouth to argue

Go sniff someone else's ass, lying troll.

#26 | Posted by eberly at 2017-12-12 09:25 PM | Reply

"YOU MUST BE A ROBOT!! YOU MUST BE IGNORANT! BLAH BLAH!!"

What a sissy. How many purses do you own, hilda?

#27 | Posted by eberly at 2017-12-12 09:27 PM | Reply

What a sissy. How many purses do you own, hilda?

#27 | Posted by eberly

I'm sorry, what's the implication here?
That if you have the brains to see how dangerous trump is you must be a woman?

Are you saying men are stupid?

#28 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2017-12-12 09:29 PM | Reply

"Well, at least millenials still have the option of enlisting to become cannon fodder for the 1% and the MIC."

or be drafted like in Vietnam. You know...the good old days when the American dream wasn't dead.

LOL

#29 | Posted by eberly at 2017-12-12 09:31 PM | Reply

"Are you saying I'm stupid?"

yes. and plonked.

#30 | Posted by eberly at 2017-12-12 09:32 PM | Reply

Wake me up when Trump topples a government like the last administration

Obama toppled the government?

#31 | Posted by ClownShack at 2017-12-12 09:50 PM | Reply

"Are you saying I'm stupid?"

yes. and plonked.

#30 | Posted by eberly

Enjoy your safe space snowflake.

#32 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2017-12-12 09:56 PM | Reply

Exactly. You have to put words in my mouth to argue
Go sniff someone else's ass, lying troll.

#26 | POSTED BY EBERLY

Pointing out the implications of one's words isn't putting words in their mouth.

If the interpretation should be different, spell it out instead of throwing a tantrum when the logical conclusion of your statements is reached.

#33 | Posted by jpw at 2017-12-12 10:25 PM | Reply

Logical my ass.

#34 | Posted by eberly at 2017-12-12 10:29 PM | Reply

JPW, let that ------- learn to read. Let that ------- learn to stop assigning positions never taken or make up words never written.

It's all he can do.

#35 | Posted by eberly at 2017-12-12 10:32 PM | Reply

Go back to #16, JPW. Speakstupid jumped right in with falsehoods with zero justification. I never said nor implied anything of the sort.

#36 | Posted by eberly at 2017-12-12 10:40 PM | Reply

It comes across as you think he sucks but isn't anything to worry about.

That's how I took it when I first read the thread.

In any case, we averted having a second known sexual predator elected to national office by 0.8% of the votes (according to CNN).

Sanity prevailed by 0.8%...I'll take that small win for sanity and join you in the 'not worrying about it club' for the evening.

#37 | Posted by jpw at 2017-12-12 10:50 PM | Reply

Obama toppled the government?

#31 | POSTED BY CLOWNSHACK

Llibya

#38 | Posted by JeffJ at 2017-12-13 12:06 AM | Reply

Nuclear brinksmanship isn't dangerous?
You must be radiation proof.

The threat of nuclear war is far less today, in spite of Trump, than it was before the USSR collapsed.

Environmental destruction isn't dangerous?
You must be a robot.

HIs environmental policy is standard boilerplate GOP. It would be no different had Rubio or Cruz gotten the nod.

Ruining american's influence and reputation isn't dangerous?
YOu must be ignorant as hell.

#25 | POSTED BY SPEAKSOFTLY

I thought you were against America being the world police. I thought our aggressive foreign policy was bad. So far, Trump is much more restrained than Bush and even Obama.

#39 | Posted by JeffJ at 2017-12-13 12:10 AM | Reply

Median household income is at an all-time high...and the American Dream is dead?

What's certainly not dead is their sense of entitlement.

#40 | Posted by madbomber at 2017-12-13 04:00 AM | Reply

Median household income is at an all-time high...and the American Dream is dead?

What's certainly not dead is their sense of entitlement.

#40 | POSTED BY MADBOMBER

Rising wealth at the top is skewing the median household number.

So it's not a "sense of entitlement".

#41 | Posted by PinchALoaf at 2017-12-13 04:09 AM | Reply

"Rising wealth at the top is skewing the median household number."

Um, no, mathelete...that's not how median works.

Median means that there are an equal number of people making more thanamount as there are making less. It's the center of the Bell curve, and as such the best indicator of where society's earnings rest overall.

And right now, it's higher than it ever has been in both real and inflation-adjusted dollars.

#42 | Posted by madbomber at 2017-12-13 05:02 AM | Reply | Funny: 1

Um, no, mathelete...that's not how median works.

Median means that there are an equal number of people making more thanamount as there are making less. It's the center of the Bell curve, and as such the best indicator of where society's earnings rest overall.

And right now, it's higher than it ever has been in both real and inflation-adjusted dollars.

#42 | POSTED BY MADBOMBER

Wealth redistributed toward the top drags the median household income number along with it ...

Not hard.

#43 | Posted by PinchALoaf at 2017-12-13 05:13 AM | Reply | Funny: 1

"Wealth redistributed toward the top drags the median household income number along with it"

What was your final grade when you took statistics 101? You appear to be confusing median with average. They are different.

Median income is calculated based on actual incomes and data points. Whether the top income earner makes ten times the median income or a million times the median income, the median income won't change. That's why left or right shifts are such a good indicator of the health of the economy. Because it's basically measuring the center.

#44 | Posted by madbomber at 2017-12-13 05:37 AM | Reply | Funny: 1

Median income is calculated based on actual incomes and data points. Whether the top income earner makes ten times the median income or a million times the median income, the median income won't change. That's why left or right shifts are such a good indicator of the health of the economy. Because it's basically measuring the center.

#44 | POSTED BY MADBOMBER

It's this type of double-speak BS that has Millennials saying the American Dream is dead.

Wealth has been redistributed toward the top for 4 decades, right in front of your nose -- Millennials understand this and despite what some random d-bag economist says about the numbers, it's very clear that people need to worker harder and longer to match the same standard of living of their parents and grandparents.

Again, this stuff is not hard.

#45 | Posted by PinchALoaf at 2017-12-13 07:13 AM | Reply | Funny: 1

"It's this type of double-speak BS that has Millennials saying the American Dream is dead."

it's math dude. Don't get pissed off at the process just because you don't understand it.

"Wealth has been redistributed toward the top for 4 decades, right in front of your nose"

Again, untrue. If it were true, you would have seen a decline in median income. But you have not. What you've seen (and ignored) is an economy where everyone is doing better, but top earners are doing better at a much higher marginal rate. And this has been translated by opportunistic politicians into a narrative intended to appeal to emotion and create a sense of injustice. Because despite the fact that you are statistically better off than your parents and grandparents were, you're still convinced you're being screwed. That's possible mostly because you don't know what being screwed really looks like. You're like a spoiled kid who's pissed off that another kid has more toys than you...not realizing that toys are a luxury that many children are only able to dream about.

#46 | Posted by madbomber at 2017-12-13 07:22 AM | Reply | Funny: 1

Sorry Madbomber... you are right about median income being at an all time high (it just recently surpassed the peak in '99), but that does not mean that wealth has not been redistributed.

For one, income is not wealth. Policies that encourage increases in asset prices, and tax those gains at lower rates, while punishing earned income at lower rates has a much higher effect on actual wealth.

And, while median income is higher the economy is also larger and more productive. If you compare the increase in productivity of the economy to the median income, it becomes clear that the wealth and income from over 90% of those productivity gains is NOT reflected in an increase in median income (because it has gone to the top, not to the average American).

#48 | Posted by gtbritishskull at 2017-12-13 09:08 AM | Reply

Also, jawing off on how the "American Dream" is undefined is a waste of time. Throw off your Republican (party of "no") tendencies and try actually adding something constructive.

I define the American Dream as America being a meritocracy. That the circumstances of your birth should not matter (who you are born to, where, your race, your background, etc). That you should succeed or fail based upon your innate talents and drive.

It is pretty clear that Republicans have done everything they can to kill that dream. Preferring unearned income over earned income. Nominating people to head their party based on the fact that they were born to advantage (all of them for the past 20 years... Trump, Romney, McCain, Bush). Getting rid of safety nets that would allow the average man to actually risk it all on pursuing innovative ideas without also risking their health or family.

Come on... why are they trying to get rid of the death tax? Does that further the American Dream? Does inherited wealth fit your definition of the American Dream? It doesn't fit mine. Republicans are all about consolidating power to their donors. So they do everything they can to make sure that the best and brightest DON'T have a chance to succeed and lead this country because that would threaten the power of their rich donors. That is why so many millennials think the American Dream is dead.

#49 | Posted by gtbritishskull at 2017-12-13 09:21 AM | Reply

"Again, untrue. If it were true, you would have seen a decline in median income. But you have not."

Utter BS. If the benefits of increased productivity had flowed, as it traditionally did in America, to the workers we wouldn't be stuggling to stay afloat.

"That's possible mostly because you don't know what being screwed really looks like. You're like a spoiled kid who's pissed off that another kid has more toys than you...not realizing that toys are a luxury that many children are only able to dream about."

Go f yourself.

#50 | Posted by danni at 2017-12-13 09:37 AM | Reply

"You should be equally thankful, because I'm going to hazard a guess that these rich people are paying for your fair share, a fair share you couldn't likely pay on your own, and a share that provides you with the standard of living that you've come to enjoy...all the while bleating on about how they owe you more."

Yeah, as they set up hedge funds to buy foreclosed homes and rent them back to us. You are so full of crap that I have to wonder why anyone would post such crap without being paid. Do you get paid to post your lies?

#51 | Posted by danni at 2017-12-13 09:41 AM | Reply

The easy way to sum it up is that this generation will be the first in history to do worse than their parents.

#52 | Posted by Sycophant at 2017-12-13 09:53 AM | Reply

"For one, income is not wealth. Policies that encourage increases in asset prices, and tax those gains at lower rates, while punishing earned income at lower rates has a much higher effect on actual wealth."

That's a great point, one that certainly needs to be taken into account. But if you look at median household net wealth, it's pretty close to median household income graphs. Id don't think that tells the whole story though, given that many households receive non-M1/M2 asset benefits that have monetary value, but are difficult to quantify.

"And, while median income is higher the economy is also larger and more productive. If you compare the increase in productivity of the economy to the median income, it becomes clear that the wealth and income from over 90% of those productivity gains is NOT reflected in an increase in median income (because it has gone to the top, not to the average American)."

Also true, but remember that labor productivity is total output divided by labor input. technological advancements that increase output relative to labor input will automatically drive a higher productivity rate, yet it was the result of capital input, not more effective labor. So it would make sense that the benefits of this higher productivity would go to whatever source drove the higher output. And it's not likely to be labor.

#53 | Posted by madbomber at 2017-12-13 09:58 AM | Reply

"Yeah, as they set up hedge funds to buy foreclosed homes and rent them back to us. You are so full of crap that I have to wonder why anyone would post such crap without being paid. Do you get paid to post your lies?"

Everything you post just demonstrates how reliant on rich people you are. You should thank them for taking care of you as well as they do. I'm sure they have higher expectations of their own children...but then again they probably realize that there is a hope for their children that is seemingly absent in you.

"The easy way to sum it up is that this generation will be the first in history to do worse than their parents."

How so? If you look at statistics...that's not really the case. Although doing better (or worse) is somewhat subjective.

#55 | Posted by madbomber at 2017-12-13 10:02 AM | Reply

I'm sorry GTB, I misspoke earlier. The average American has seen higher incomes (higher median income)...but that has had a minimal affect, prima facie, on median household wealth. And I guess to tie back in to Sycophant's point, I probably make two to three times what my parents made in terms of labor income, but my household wealth is much lower...sort of. My parents had retirement savings, which were quantifiable. I have a military retirement coming to me when I complete my service, but I can't really record that as an asset at this point.

#56 | Posted by madbomber at 2017-12-13 10:07 AM | Reply

"yet it was the result of capital input, not more effective labor. So it would make sense that the benefits of this higher productivity would go to whatever source drove the higher output."

We'll remember that the next time you want to start another war and let you fight it yourselves. Greed is ugly, you are ugly.

#57 | Posted by danni at 2017-12-13 10:12 AM | Reply

""Go f yourself."
You're a case in point. Thanks, Danni."

Go F yourself MB, you are a pathetic excuse for a human being.

#58 | Posted by danni at 2017-12-13 10:13 AM | Reply

Do you really want to make knowledge the standard by which to judge people? Doesn't that sort of work against you?

#8 | Posted by DirkStruan

I guess you don't know the answer either.

#59 | Posted by Sniper at 2017-12-13 10:29 AM | Reply

Reaganomics stole prosperity from the future to make the 80s seem awesome. Blow up the deficit to make it rain for the rich.

#15 | Posted by SpeakSoftly

Is that what you call what o'bummer did during his 8 years as pres?

#61 | Posted by Sniper at 2017-12-13 10:33 AM | Reply

"Saying trump is no more concerning than any other crappy politician"

Where did I say that?

#17 | Posted by eberly

They make stuff up to suit their brain washed agenda.

#62 | Posted by Sniper at 2017-12-13 10:34 AM | Reply

And being real is admitting that 4 decades worth of evidence shows that tax cuts do not pay for themselves, by the way.

#18 | Posted by PinchALoaf

You could NEVER pay for the way politicians spend other people's money.

#63 | Posted by Sniper at 2017-12-13 10:36 AM | Reply

What the American Dream isn't is having to work 3 jobs to equal the same standard of living that past generations had -- Millennials clearly see this and have connected the dots.

#22 | Posted by PinchALoaf

Not even close pinch. They work 3 jobs to pay for their high flying living. $300 per month cell phone, $200 per month cable bill. A car for every member of the family and a 4,000 sf house.

#64 | Posted by Sniper at 2017-12-13 10:40 AM | Reply

Wealth redistributed toward the top drags the median household income number along with it ...

Not hard.

#43 | Posted by PinchALoaf

That is an average pin. Average not median. You must have had modern math in school, not real math.

#66 | Posted by Sniper at 2017-12-13 10:47 AM | Reply

I'm sorry GTB, I misspoke earlier. The average American has seen higher incomes (higher median income)...but that has had a minimal affect, prima facie, on median household wealth. And I guess to tie back in to Sycophant's point, I probably make two to three times what my parents made in terms of labor income, but my household wealth is much lower...sort of. My parents had retirement savings, which were quantifiable. I have a military retirement coming to me when I complete my service, but I can't really record that as an asset at this point.

#56 | POSTED BY MADBOMBER

I don't think you understand the numbers.

Higher median income doesn't mean greater buying power when the cost of goods and services along with debt getting to those income levels so drastically increases.

Here's an article from MarketWatch (note Conservative financial news site): www.marketwatch.com

#67 | Posted by Sycophant at 2017-12-13 10:48 AM | Reply

Wealth redistributed toward the top drags the median household income number along with it ...
Not hard.
#43 | Posted by PinchALoaf
That is an average pin. Average not median. You must have had modern math in school, not real math.
#66 | POSTED BY SNIPER

And you must have missed basic economics: Income does not equal Wealth.

Its great if I'm making $20,000 more each year but that doesn't account for any debt I've accrued and the relative increases in prices of goods and services.

#69 | Posted by Sycophant at 2017-12-13 10:50 AM | Reply

#64 | POSTED BY SNIPER

Hah...

A lot of millennials are "cord-cutters", so no cable bill. Replaced by maybe ~$40 per month in streaming services (netflix, hulu, hbo go).

Who pays $300 per month on a cell phone? I pay ~$100 per month for me and my wife.

And then millennials are also much more likely than previous generations to have no car at all. www.latimes.com

Also smaller homes... www.bostonglobe.com

ALL of you stereotypes are wrong. You are just projecting YOUR GENERATION'S crappy decisions on millennials.

What else do you got?

#70 | Posted by gtbritishskull at 2017-12-13 10:50 AM | Reply

#65 | POSTED BY SNIPER

You've become an embarrassment.

#71 | Posted by Sycophant at 2017-12-13 10:51 AM | Reply

Mad,

If you're going to chide people for not knowing math you should probably know it yourself.

The median is not the center of a bell curve. It's simply my the middle number of a series. If you have one million people making $10 a year, one million people making $10 million dollars a year and one guy making $59k a year, the median is $59K a year.

So yes, while it's better than mean it still only says where the middle ground is, not how robust or large that middle ground is.

Which is why many millenials see the dream as being dead.

#72 | Posted by jpw at 2017-12-13 10:52 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

How much does a wild eye lib job pay?

#68 | POSTED BY HANS

Depends. Are you willing to wear black and stand up front and provoke the Nazi's?

#73 | Posted by donnerboy at 2017-12-13 10:55 AM | Reply | Funny: 1

Not even close pinch. They work 3 jobs to pay for their high flying living. $300 per month cell phone, $200 per month cable bill. A car for every member of the family and a 4,000 sf house.

#64 | POSTED BY SNIPER

You don't get out very often do you?

Your entire world perception is a caricature, nothing more.

#74 | Posted by jpw at 2017-12-13 10:56 AM | Reply

"ALL of you stereotypes are wrong. You are just projecting YOUR GENERATION'S crappy decisions on millennials."

Don't make this a "generational thing." The extreme right would like nothing more than for this to change from a class war to a generational war. I have defended millenials many times here and will continue to do so, it is important also for boomers to realize that we need to defend and arrange for the support of the programs that now benefit us so that they will still be here for the millenials. Focus your anger on those passing tax cuts for the 1% and then saying they'll have to cut SS to pay for it, that won't hurt me but it will hurt you.
Millenials need to understand what it is that the Republicans are trying to do right now. They are trying to steal the SS trust fund that the 1% did not create, SS taxes cap out at about $110,000 dollars, so it was the middle class that paid in the money that created the trust fund. The Koch brothers didn't contriute even 1% of it. But they want to take that money away from us by using it to replace the income taxes, needed to operate our government, pay for our military, etc. with those funds. It's just theft and millenials will feel the loss of those funds when they raise your retirement age to ridiculous ages which, at your young age, you don't actually understand. You will when you are 65, trust me.

#75 | Posted by danni at 2017-12-13 11:06 AM | Reply

"You've become an embarrassment." - #71 | Posted by Sycophant at 2017-12-13 10:51 AM

Become?

sniper's been an embarrassment here since April 14, 2006.

#76 | Posted by Hans at 2017-12-13 11:06 AM | Reply

Thanks Hans;

""Nuclear Power is impractical because its total cost is impossible to control."
#29 | Posted by danni
Because of over regulation by the government during construction. Their QA program is nothing but a 'cover your ass' with paper and not controlling the quality at all."

Brilliant Sniper believed at that time that regulation of the nulear energy industry was "over regulation."

Hey Sniper.....FUKISHIMA! You idiot.

#77 | Posted by danni at 2017-12-13 11:09 AM | Reply

You're most welcome, Danni!

#78 | Posted by Hans at 2017-12-13 11:13 AM | Reply

#75 I'm sorry, is that giant pile of condescension supposed to make me think you're wise or something?

#79 | Posted by jpw at 2017-12-13 11:17 AM | Reply

"I'm sorry, is that giant pile of condescension supposed to make me think you're wise or something?"

Condescension? That's ridiculous. The fact that older people do realize that our bodies aren't what they used to be and that younger folks need to understand that while Republicans talk of cutting SS and Medicare to pay for tax cuts for the 1%? I occurs to me that, usually, the only folks concerned with "condescension" are those who are intellectually insecure.

#80 | Posted by danni at 2017-12-13 11:35 AM | Reply

"The median is not the center of a bell curve. It's simply my the middle number of a series. If you have one million people making $10 a year, one million people making $10 million dollars a year and one guy making $59k a year, the median is $59K a year."

You are literally, in very sense possible, describing the middle of the bell curve. Also known as those familiar with math as...wait for it...the "median"

"So yes, while it's better than mean it still only says where the middle ground is, not how robust or large that middle ground is."

You've really gotta apply some crazy spin to make a right-justified bell curve look like bad news. If that's your angle, my advice would be to abandon metrics altogether. Appeal to emotion exclusively. Objectivity will only open up avenues for people to think their way into a conflicting point of view.

#82 | Posted by madbomber at 2017-12-13 12:01 PM | Reply

The original american dream when it was coined is still alive and well. The problem is, entitled kids in the 70s to today have changed it's meaning to be more about what the people can be given for free instead of what people can do based on their abilities. People are so conditioned now to believe that the only way they can be happy is if they have lots of stuff with the least amount of effort. The dream was never about owning a home or anything like that. It was about opportunity. But something can't be called an opportunity if people aren't willing to take advantage of it. Boo hoo, life is hard. It takes effort, sleepless nights, and a lot of disappointment to make something of yourself (at least that's how it was for me to go from low income to upper middle class). But the opportunity is there so I did everything I could to take advantage. The ones who sit back and complain about how hard it is to take advantage of the opportunity are the ones who have killed the dream.

#84 | Posted by humtake at 2017-12-13 12:43 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Since 1975, practically all the gains in household income have gone to the top 20% of households.

If we are to believe #84, Households with spoiled kids, apparently.

#85 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-12-13 12:46 PM | Reply

You are literally, in very sense possible, describing the middle of the bell curve. Also known as those familiar with math as...wait for it...the "median"

Yeah, I realized that after I hit send.

Tell me, though, does a linear set of integers have a median?

You've really gotta apply some crazy spin to make a right-justified bell curve look like bad news.

The fact that you're appealing to hyperbole tells me you either don't get what I'm saying, you're just regurgitating something you don't understand or you're not being entirely intellectually honest and need to struggle to keep the discussion on course with your corporate shill ideals.

If the graph was Gaussian you'd have a point. But it's not.

people.hsc.edu

It's a little old but does that look Gaussian to you?

Also, what's been the relative increases of % earned income of a median level household vs a $250K+ household?

You're acting as if people getting peanuts for record output and profits should make them grateful.

#86 | Posted by jpw at 2017-12-13 12:51 PM | Reply

Objectivity...

#82 | Posted by madbomber

LOL

#87 | Posted by jpw at 2017-12-13 12:52 PM | Reply

"Tell me, though, does a linear set of integers have a median?"

Are you a math major?

I only ask because I don't really understand why integers would matter. I'm pretty certain they don't matter here, but I'll concede as a business major that maybe there is something on the scientific side that makes integers special...at least relative non-integers.

But the answer to your question...is yes...whether linear or exponential, a set of numbers will always have a median...unless you're a disciple of some crazy math think that I don't know about. And if you are I demand you tell me.

"The fact that you're appealing to hyperbole tells me you either don't get what I'm saying, you're just regurgitating something you don't understand or you're not being entirely intellectually honest and need to struggle to keep the discussion on course with your corporate shill ideals."

Soo...let's assume for a second that the Komissar who controls you is doing his due diligence...and mine is not...where is the math wrong?

"You're acting as if people getting peanuts for record output and profits should make them grateful."

But some people aren't getting peanuts. Some are getting new yachts and private jets. I think your job is to show why those getting yachts or jet's don't serve them, while those who aren't...maybe do.

#88 | Posted by madbomber at 2017-12-13 01:06 PM | Reply

"Objectivity...#82 | Posted by madbomber LOL"

Haa hah aha hahahahahahahah...

Good von..Komrade.

#89 | Posted by madbomber at 2017-12-13 01:08 PM | Reply

"The dream was never about owning a home or anything like that."

Simply not true. The dream of home ownership has always been part of the "American dream." To say otherwise is to deny reality.

#90 | Posted by danni at 2017-12-13 01:22 PM | Reply

If only you could put me up against a wall and put a bullet through my head...like your heroes used to do.

#81 | POSTED BY MADBOMBER AT 2017-12-13 11:52 AM | FLAG:

If only you had that kind of sympathy for the people corporate stooges like you will kill if your party of choice manages to tear up the ACA. But then, you will tell yourself it is really the Market killing those people and that makes it alright somehow...

#91 | Posted by DirkStruan at 2017-12-13 01:31 PM | Reply

"The dream was never about owning a home or anything like that."

Simply not true. The dream of home ownership has always been part of the "American dream." To say otherwise is to deny reality and really an attempt to lower the expectations of millenials so that the 1% can feel good about cheating them out of a decent future.

#92 | Posted by danni at 2017-12-13 01:32 PM | Reply

But some people aren't getting peanuts. Some are getting new yachts and private jets. I think your job is to show why those getting yachts or jet's don't serve them, while those who aren't...maybe do.
#88 | POSTED BY MADBOMBER AT 2017-12-13 01:06 PM | REPLY | FLA

Whereas dogmatists like you can't even ask that question.

#93 | Posted by DirkStruan at 2017-12-13 01:32 PM | Reply

A lot of millennials are "cord-cutters", so no cable bill.

#70 | Posted by gtbritishskull

You are right gtb. They live in their parents basement so all the money they make goes into their pocket for their toys.

#95 | Posted by Sniper at 2017-12-13 01:43 PM | Reply

"Just look at your paycheck." - #94 | Posted by Sniper at 2017-12-13 01:40 PM

Nothing on there about human organs or political affiliation or leanings. Tame or otherwise.

Oops.

#96 | Posted by Hans at 2017-12-13 01:44 PM | Reply

"They live in their parents basement so all the money they make goes into their pocket for their toys." - #95 | Posted by Sniper at 2017-12-13 01:43 PM | Reply | Flag: Projection

#97 | Posted by Hans at 2017-12-13 01:45 PM | Reply

Median

denoting or relating to a value or quantity lying at the midpoint of a frequency distribution of observed values or quantities, such that there is an equal probability of falling above or below it.

So the median of 10, 15 20, 500, and 1,000 is 20.

Now that was easy. Wasn't it?

#99 | Posted by Sniper at 2017-12-13 01:55 PM | Reply

"You idiot, That accident was the result of a huge wave that took out the plant. I did say construction ddan, I know nothing about their regulations over operations. "

Someone needs to learn to use his google.

Fukushima was a preventable accident. The damage was made worse and meltdown occurred because a poor choice of location and poorly designed backup power systems.

Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO), and Japan's regulator, the Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency (NISA), followed international best practices and standards, it is conceivable that they would have predicted the possibility of the plant being struck by a massive tsunami. The plant would have withstood the tsunami had its design previously been upgraded in accordance with state-of-the-art safety approaches.

carnegieendowment.org

#100 | Posted by donnerboy at 2017-12-13 02:15 PM | Reply

49% of Millennials Say American Dream is Alive.....

3% too stoned or stupid to answer or not sure if they were asking how they slept the night before????

#101 | Posted by PinkyanTheBrain at 2017-12-13 03:10 PM | Reply

"They live in their parents basement
#95 | POSTED BY SNIPER"

The Voice Of Experience.

#102 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-12-13 03:20 PM | Reply

"Wealth has been redistributed toward the top for 4 decades, right in front of your nose"

"Again, untrue. If it were true, you would have seen a decline in median income."

Since 1975, practically all the gains in household income have gone to the top 20% of households.

^
That is the change in the distribution of income he's talking about, --------------.

#103 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-12-13 03:30 PM | Reply

"Wealth has been redistributed toward the top for 4 decades, right in front of your nose"
Again, untrue. If it were true, you would have seen a decline in median income.
#46 | POSTED BY MADBOMBER

Sure; if you confuse "median" for "average".

#104 | Posted by IndianaJones at 2017-12-13 04:45 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Or if you conflate wealth with income...

#105 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-12-13 04:47 PM | Reply

#95 | POSTED BY SNIPER

Well... when their parents live in extravagant 4000sq houses with $200 cable bills and idiotic $300 cell phone bills and a car for every member of the family instead of saving properly for retirement, why not take advantage of being thrifty by saving on rent?

Your generation is a slave to consumerist culture. Millennials are not. And you are pissed off that they are not making the same stupid mistakes that you did. Get over it. Your generation was easily manipulated because they are a slave to their fear of immigrants, minorities, gays, women's rights, and any other sort of change that puts more people on a level playing field. That is why your generation elected Trump (decisiondeskhq.com)... because he represents who you are and what you believe in. You are the "zero sum" generation. You believe that the only way you can get ahead is by pushing down people with less power than you. And you will be remembered for it.

My generation, on the other hand, does not just believe in "winning" and "losing", but instead understands that by taking a wholistic view (understanding the "other side" and working to ensure that they also succeed) you can get more benefits for everyone, as well as maximizing value to society (btw... that is the basis of competent negotiations, and we have such incompetent foreign policy right now because it is completely antithetical to Trump).

So take your patronizing attitude and shove it. You have screwed this country up, and we realize that (similar to what Democrats have to do after every Republican president) we will have to come behind you and clean it up.

#106 | Posted by gtbritishskull at 2017-12-13 04:53 PM | Reply

I only ask because I don't really understand why integers would matter.

It was just for simplicity sake. The median of 1-9 vs the median of 3.5, 4.7, 6.9......23.8.

Soo...let's assume for a second that the Komissar who controls you is doing his due diligence...and mine is not...where is the math wrong?

LOL yes yes I'm a communist.

The math is wrong because the distribution matters more than the mean. Look at the graph I posted using the 2012 income distribution numbers. It's front loaded in the $5000 intervals up to about $50,000. Which means, because we're talking about median, that an equal number of people were spread out from $50,000 to $250,000 or more (where the graph stopped), with most of them being in the upper brackets.

So, all together, it means you have large concentrations of people at or below median balanced out by a smear of above median earners that are dominated by really high earners.

Which gets us income inequality and why it's a driving factor in many people's views on the economy and their futures.

But some people aren't getting peanuts. Some are getting new yachts and private jets.

What's the bigger economic driver, a few buying singular expensive items or many buying a multitude of smaller, abundant items?

Also, when you're talking log scale changes in income levels between those two groups you again get to inequality and why it's a driver of people's opinions of the economy and their future.

#107 | Posted by jpw at 2017-12-13 04:55 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

with most of them being in the upper brackets.

Should be many, not most.

#108 | Posted by jpw at 2017-12-13 04:55 PM | Reply

#65 | POSTED BY SNIPER

Go ---- yourself, -------.

#109 | Posted by PinchALoaf at 2017-12-13 07:17 PM | Reply

"That is the change in the distribution of income he's talking about, --------------."

I get that. Everyone's getting richer, but some are getting richer at a higher marginal rate. So they owe you.

I get it.

#111 | Posted by madbomber at 2017-12-13 07:48 PM | Reply

It's a pretty pathetic argument to claim that if someone else has more than you they owe you. When my kids act like you do, I take away their electronics...remind them of how utterly ------- fortunate they are to live where they live and enjoy the lifestyle that has been provided to them.

You should be equally thankful, because I'm going to hazard a guess that these rich people are paying for your fair share, a fair share you couldn't likely pay on your own, and a share that provides you with the standard of living that you've come to enjoy...all the while bleating on about how they owe you more.

#47 | POSTED BY MADBOMBER

Millionaires and billionaires are godammned lucky that Quislings like you do their lying for them ...

The main reason they have all their obscene wealth is because in America the rules allow them to buy the political process in order to weasel out of paying their fair share.

If it were up to me, the country would return to Eisenhower tax rates of 90%. And for good measure we would bring back the draft, no exceptions, so millionaire and billionaire families would also share in the sacrifice of defending this great nation. You want to make your millions and billions in America? Fine, but your children will serve 3 years on active duty in the Army.

Another change I'd enact is hard time for white collar crime. Memo to hedgefund douchebags: You want to steal from peoples pensions and wreck the economy? Getting caught means you're going to a pound-me-in-the-ass prison ... no more country club spa retreat prison time anymore -- don't drop the soap, dope.

As George Carlin said so perfectly in the video at the top of this thread, "they don't care about you, at all".

Americans like me make this country great, not the millionaires and billionaires -------- who steal their wealth from honest hardworking citizens who try to play by the rules.

#112 | Posted by PinchALoaf at 2017-12-13 07:50 PM | Reply

"The math is wrong because the distribution matters more than the mean."

It matters to you because you're more concerned with income inequality than in increased household wealth or income. Income inequality is just one of many forms on inequality that I do not expect government to address, given that these inequalities are an output of how a free society allocates its time, wealth and other resources.

Is it safe for me to assume that you would prefer a stagnant economy where no one is getting richer over one where everyone is getting richer, but some are doing so at a higher marginal rate?

#113 | Posted by madbomber at 2017-12-13 07:55 PM | Reply

"Millionaires and billionaires are godammned lucky that Quislings like you do their lying for them ..."

I appreciate the compliment...but I don't think they need me. Not nearly as much as I nned them anyway, and nowhere near as much as you do.

"The main reason they have all their obscene wealth is because in America the rules allow them to buy the political process in order to weasel out of paying their fair share."

Fair being subjective I suppose...in your mind "fair" being everything?

#114 | Posted by madbomber at 2017-12-13 07:58 PM | Reply

"If it were up to me, the country would return to Eisenhower tax rates of 90%."

On what level of income? You could implement 100% tax rate on incomes in excess of $40 million a year...it's not going to get you much.

If you imposed the 1951 top tax rate of 91% on incomes over $1,766,108, in 2017 it would only affect incomes over $16,755,542 (adjusted for inflation). In fact the applicable tax rate from 1951 to the highest income bracket in 2017 would be somewhere in the neighborhood of 27%.

#115 | Posted by madbomber at 2017-12-13 08:04 PM | Reply

"Americans like me make this country great, not the millionaires and billionaires -------- who steal their wealth from honest hardworking citizens who try to play by the rules."

Do you mind me asking what it is that you do that makes this country so great? The rich pay my fair share of the taxes...what are you doing for me?

#116 | Posted by madbomber at 2017-12-13 08:05 PM | Reply

"I appreciate the compliment...but I don't think they need me. Not nearly as much as I nned them anyway, and nowhere near as much as you do."

Give yourself some credit. They need you to work for crumbs while they rake in record profits. They need you to provide political cover for their exploitation of others. They need you to spread the myth that society owes them something rather than the reverse. Rubes like you are what let them stay in power.

#118 | Posted by DirkStruan at 2017-12-13 08:11 PM | Reply

Let me ask you this pinch...if you were to disappear off the face of the planet, how would I be affected? Because if the rich disappear, my tax bill goes up immediately to a rate I don't know that I could afford.

#117 | POSTED BY MADBOMBER AT 2017-12-13 08:11 PM | FLAG:

Engaging in absurd hypotheticals, are we?

Let me try: you would be able to afford it because wealth would be less concentrated and you would, in turn, be better off. Or, taxes would go down because the expenses the rich force upon the country (imperialist wars, costly regulatory battles, environmental damage, redress of exploitative working conditions through social welfare, etc) would vanish with them.

#119 | Posted by DirkStruan at 2017-12-13 08:16 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

I appreciate the compliment...but I don't think they need me. Not nearly as much as I nned them anyway, and nowhere near as much as you do.

#114 | POSTED BY MADBOMBER

Before the pitchforks come out, you can save yourself by repudiating, today, the lies of voodoo economics ...

The Pitchforks Are Coming ... For Us Plutocrats
www.politico.com

Seeing where things are headed is the essence of entrepreneurship. And what do I see in our future now?

I see pitchforks.

At the same time that people like you and me are thriving beyond the dreams of any plutocrats in history, the rest of the country -- the 99.99 percent -- is lagging far behind.

The divide between the haves and have-nots is getting worse really, really fast.

In 1980, the top 1 percent controlled about 8 percent of U.S. national income.

The bottom 50 percent shared about 18 percent.

Today the top 1 percent share about 20 percent; the bottom 50 percent, just 12 percent.

But the problem isn't that we have inequality. Some inequality is intrinsic to any high-functioning capitalist economy.

The problem is that inequality is at historically high levels and getting worse every day.

Our country is rapidly becoming less a capitalist society and more a feudal society.

Unless our policies change dramatically, the middle class will disappear, and we will be back to late 18th-century France. Before the revolution.

And so I have a message for my fellow filthy rich, for all of us who live in our gated bubble worlds: Wake up, people. It won't last.

If we don't do something to fix the glaring inequities in this economy, the pitchforks are going to come for us.

No society can sustain this kind of rising inequality.

In fact, there is no example in human history where wealth accumulated like this and the pitchforks didn't eventually come out.

You show me a highly unequal society, and I will show you a police state. Or an uprising.

There are no counterexamples. None.

It's not if, it's when.


You don't have to be a Quisling for the douchebag billionaires. You can repent now by rejecting the lies of trickle down BS economics and re-join normal America, and save yourself.

#120 | Posted by PinchALoaf at 2017-12-13 08:17 PM | Reply

The rich pay my fair share of the taxes...what are you doing for me?

#116 | POSTED BY MADBOMBER AT 2017-12-13 08:05 PM | FLAG:

Fair by whose definition, you drooling sycophant? And these taxes they pay, is it with money the really deserve? What value do they actually add?

#121 | Posted by DirkStruan at 2017-12-13 08:18 PM | Reply

www.theatlantic.com

#122 | Posted by DirkStruan at 2017-12-13 08:22 PM | Reply

"They need you to work for crumbs while they rake in record profits. They need you to provide political cover for their exploitation of others. They need you to spread the myth that society owes them something rather than the reverse. Rubes like you are what let them stay in power."

OK...and in return I am rewarded with six figs plus and a pretty gnarly standard of living?

Is Bernie offering more?

#123 | Posted by madbomber at 2017-12-13 08:28 PM | Reply

"Let me try: you would be able to afford it because wealth would be less concentrated and you would, in turn, be better off."

Be able to afford it?

Does my economic value go up because high income earners are no longer around? I can't see how that would be true. I can't see how my earnings would increase just because someone else wasn't earning.

"Or, taxes would go down because the expenses the rich force upon the country (imperialist wars, costly regulatory battles, environmental damage, redress of exploitative working conditions through social welfare, etc) would vanish with them."

My goodness...I think you may be the last remaining Marxist...cool.

#124 | Posted by madbomber at 2017-12-13 08:31 PM | Reply

"You don't have to be a Quisling for the douchebag billionaires. You can repent now by rejecting the lies of trickle down BS economics and re-join normal America, and save yourself."

I'll save myself by keeping a few spare magazines and a bug-out kit.

Whatever revolution you're waiting on...it will fail. Because if you're successful...if the rich are vanquished...then you lose everything they have provided for you for so long. I get that you can't really grasp this. You look at your lifestyle as something that is due to you...it's OK. My kids are the same way. Like them, you've just never really put a lot of thought into why you are able to live as well as you do.

Part of me hopes you succeed...just to learn the lesson. Sometimes we need to get burned once in a while. But I also know that learning that lesson would be heartbreaking for millions of people. Think Venezuela. And even though I sometimes wish I could find a way to show my kids how much they actually have, I'm not going to throw them out in the street just to prove a point.

My real hope is that people like you will at some point sit down and think through whatever drastic action they may be considering. If you took the time to apply a little critical thought, you'd realize that I'm right.

#125 | Posted by madbomber at 2017-12-13 08:38 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"Does my economic value go up because high income earners are no longer around? I can't see how that would be true. I can't see how my earnings would increase just because someone else wasn't earning."

Why because profits could now be spread around rather than concentrated at the top of the chain, of course.

"My goodness...I think you may be the last remaining Marxist...cool."

No counter argument, I see. Not so cool.

#126 | Posted by DirkStruan at 2017-12-13 08:40 PM | Reply

"Fair by whose definition, you drooling sycophant? And these taxes they pay, is it with money the really deserve? What value do they actually add?"

In college, I had a friend who was a stripper. At 19 years old, she had her own house, a Corvette, and a Landcruiser.

She probably made more money than most in our neighborhood. What value did she add?

Should the taxpayer have taken her money from her and given it back to the noble proletarian who gave it to her in the first place?

#127 | Posted by madbomber at 2017-12-13 08:40 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"Is Bernie offering more?"

You bet: a society that has a bit more of that freedom you pretend to value.

#128 | Posted by DirkStruan at 2017-12-13 08:42 PM | Reply

"Why because profits could now be spread around rather than concentrated at the top of the chain, of course."

You're making the utterly idiot assumption that the activities that had previously been conducted and managed by high income earners would continue in their absence. Which is pretty much like saying that brain surgery would continue even after all the brain surgeons were gone.

And realistically, this is pretty much what Pol Pot did in Cambodia. To la leeser degree, what Allende did in Chile and Chavez in Venezuela...which one of those are you going to point to as the greatest success story?

#129 | Posted by madbomber at 2017-12-13 08:43 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Whatever revolution you're waiting on...it will fail. Because if you're successful...if the rich are vanquished...
#125 | Posted by madbomber

Dude you are living in a paranoid delusion where the poor want to wipe away the rich.

We simply don't want them bribing the government to do whatever they want.

And to you that means we'll be like venezuela or communist china.

What a drama queen.

#130 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2017-12-13 08:44 PM | Reply

"You bet: a society that has a bit more of that freedom you pretend to value."

How am I more free when it's my responsibility to provide a life for those who refuse to do it for themselves? The Soviets must have been really, really free.

#131 | Posted by madbomber at 2017-12-13 08:45 PM | Reply

"Whatever revolution you're waiting on...it will fail. Because if you're successful...if the rich are vanquished...then you lose everything they have provided for you for so long. I get that you can't really grasp this."

Is there an argument in their somewhere? Why, exactly, does anyone owe the rich a damned thing?

#132 | Posted by DirkStruan at 2017-12-13 08:45 PM | Reply

"How am I more free when it's my responsibility to provide a life for those who refuse to do it for themselves?"

You do that now: for the rich. What the rest of us are talking about is adjusting that situation.

#133 | Posted by DirkStruan at 2017-12-13 08:47 PM | Reply

"Dude you are living in a paranoid delusion where the poor want to wipe away the rich."

I'm not sure.

I know you want to harness the wealth creating potential of the rich for your own end...but all other things being equal, they have a say. And if they tell you to go ---- yourself...then what? Do you let the progressive dream die, or do you put a gun to their head and let them know what happens if they don't do what you say. Lenin was faced with that choice, once upon a time. His response is now a matter of history.

"We simply don't want them bribing the government to do whatever they want."

Do you want anyone bribing the government?

"And to you that means we'll be like venezuela or communist china."

China...if the stars all align and the people of the US are somehow fortunate...but more likely Venezuela.

#134 | Posted by madbomber at 2017-12-13 08:48 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"You do that now: for the rich. What the rest of us are talking about is adjusting that situation."

Oh no...let's be perfectly clear about this...they pay for me. If they were to go away, my bills would only go up. And not only that, but all of those high value services they provide-like medical care-those are going to become scarce as well.

I'm on the first inner tube to Utila.

#135 | Posted by madbomber at 2017-12-13 08:49 PM | Reply

"You're making the utterly idiot assumption that the activities that had previously been conducted and managed by high income earners would continue in their absence. Which is pretty much like saying that brain surgery would continue even after all the brain surgeons were gone."

You are making the even more foolish assumption that the rich universally add value in any proportion to their wealth. Alas, this isn't true outside your Randroid fantasyland.

#136 | Posted by DirkStruan at 2017-12-13 08:50 PM | Reply

"Do you want anyone bribing the government?" - #134 | Posted by madbomber at 2017-12-13 08:48 PM

Compliments of the Citizens United decision.

#137 | Posted by Hans at 2017-12-13 08:50 PM | Reply

"Oh no...let's be perfectly clear about this...they pay for me."

Plantation owners paid for slaves, too. Would you call that a fair arrangement?

#138 | Posted by DirkStruan at 2017-12-13 08:52 PM | Reply

"Do you want anyone bribing the government?"

No. You seem fine with it, however. Why is that, seeing as you are so concerned with freedom?

#139 | Posted by DirkStruan at 2017-12-13 08:54 PM | Reply

A few spare magazines and a bug out kit... the preparation occasioned by a guilty conscience.

#140 | Posted by DirkStruan at 2017-12-13 08:58 PM | Reply

- Randroid fantasyland.

Some people only vacation there. MythB is a full-time resident.

I mean, if he ever became one of them, he'd want to pay about the same as his secretary, too.... less maybe, right?

Gotta keep that dream alive!

#141 | Posted by Corky at 2017-12-13 08:58 PM | Reply

"I know you want to harness the wealth creating potential of the rich for your own end"

And you don't? You don't want there to be any taxes at all?
How would you get a paycheck, who would pay for your GI Bill?

#142 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-12-13 09:05 PM | Reply

"Plantation owners paid for slaves, too. Would you call that a fair arrangement?"

Dude, if you're being honest, what Bernie is offering is slavery...with a dental plan.

Not something I'm going to willingly embrace. Which is why you (and Lenin) need a Lavrentiy Beria to, um, compel the non-believers.

#143 | Posted by madbomber at 2017-12-13 09:11 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

"Dude, if you're being honest, what Bernie is offering is slavery...with a dental plan."

You're a slave because you pay taxes... on your government paycheck derived from taxes.
Plus you get a slave pension, congratulations on that!

#144 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-12-13 09:16 PM | Reply

"Not something I'm going to willingly embrace."

Except for that whole "dedicating your life to the military" thing, sure.

#145 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-12-13 09:17 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"Dude, if you're being honest, what Bernie is offering is slavery...with a dental plan."

And how do you figure that? Undermining the plutocrats you now to sounds like the reverse.

"Not something I'm going to willingly embrace. Which is why you (and Lenin) need a Lavrentiy Beria to, um, compel the non-believers."

Get off your high horse before you hurt yourself. You are all about coercion. You just think when it is the coercion of the market or of a bought and paid for government for and by the very wealthy, it somehow doesn't count.

#146 | Posted by DirkStruan at 2017-12-13 09:20 PM | Reply

"I get that. Everyone's getting richer, but some are getting richer at a higher marginal rate. So they owe you."

It's pretty clear you don't.

#147 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-12-13 09:24 PM | Reply

TUESDAY, DECEMBER 12, 2017
48% of Millennials Say American Dream is Dead

it is, so they'll birth a new one. something wonderful.... all these... except Europa.

#148 | Posted by ichiro at 2017-12-13 10:10 PM | Reply

"48% of Millennials Say American Dream is Dead"

48 percent.
Meanwhile, eligible voter turnout in Alabama was just over 40%.
Doesn't the "American Dream" include participatory democracy?
I remember a Norman Rockwell painting on the topic... oh right, I'm dreaming the American Dream, my bad!

#149 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-12-14 12:34 AM | Reply

If they weren't so stupid they would save the money they waste at Starbucks and invest in time travel and go back to 1970, way back before we destroyed the world they live in.

#150 | Posted by MrSilenceDogood at 2017-12-14 01:28 AM | Reply

It matters to you because you're more concerned with income inequality than in increased household wealth or income.

No, it matters to those who think the American dream is dead.

You know, *HELLO! McFly!* the topic of the thread?

Income inequality is just one of many forms on inequality that I do not expect government to address, given that these inequalities are an output of how a free society allocates its time, wealth and other resources.
Is it safe for me to assume that you would prefer a stagnant economy where no one is getting richer over one where everyone is getting richer, but some are doing so at a higher marginal rate?

#113 | POSTED BY MADBOMBER

No. As usual, drop the hyperbole, it only makes you look stupid or intellectually lazy.

I'm for reasonable regulation and government playing the role it's supposed in looking out for it's citizens as a whole.

That of course means some income inequality will exist. Duh. There's nothing wrong with profit motive.

The problem, for me, is when it becomes the extreme version we have now. Where investors want MORE profit every quarter or else they jump ship and invest elsewhere. It isn't good enough to merely be profitable, it must be "mine mine mine mine gimme gimme gimme gimme" type of capitalism.

I'm also against the extreme wealth inequality we have currently that's largely driven by money giving one the power to bend, break or, in extreme cases, write the rules. Sorry, but that grand slam doesn't count when you hit it from third off a tee.

#151 | Posted by jpw at 2017-12-14 01:31 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Not nearly as much as I nned them anyway, and nowhere near as much as you do.

#152 | Posted by jpw at 2017-12-14 01:34 AM | Reply

Not nearly as much as I nned them anyway, and nowhere near as much as you do.

Are you constantly wiping all the crap off your nose or are you just used to the smell by now?

Because God damned you seem like you'll blow anything that claims to be a CEO.

(Oops bad HTML on that last one...)

#153 | Posted by jpw at 2017-12-14 01:34 AM | Reply

"given that these inequalities are an output of how a free society allocates its time, wealth and other resources. "

When did our society become a free society?
1965, 1865?

#154 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-12-14 01:40 AM | Reply

You could implement 100% tax rate on incomes in excess of $40 million a year...it's not going to get you much.
If you imposed the 1951 top tax rate of 91% on incomes over $1,766,108, in 2017 it would only affect incomes over $16,755,542 (adjusted for inflation).

Then why are you guys such soulless bastards when it comes to cutting it?

In fact the applicable tax rate from 1951 to the highest income bracket in 2017 would be somewhere in the neighborhood of 27%.
#115 | POSTED BY MADBOMBER

Link?

#155 | Posted by jpw at 2017-12-14 01:47 AM | Reply

"You could implement 100% tax rate on incomes in excess of $40 million a year...it's not going to get you much. "

But... I thought they were the ones who paid your fair share?

#156 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-12-14 01:48 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#125 | POSTED BY MADBOMBER

LOL so that's why you lick corporate balls. You think it's a good return for your "six figs" and you hope to get more.

Which means you're just a whore, willing to fawn and flatter for a little bit more.

Have some dignity. Damn, dude.

#157 | Posted by jpw at 2017-12-14 01:51 AM | Reply

You're making the utterly idiot assumption that the activities that had previously been conducted and managed by high income earners would continue in their absence.

If that free market the right claims exists actually exists it should balance out.

People will take initiative and move up the ladder, no?

#158 | Posted by jpw at 2017-12-14 01:53 AM | Reply

#149 wait until we have cyber voting. we need auto registration, too.

#159 | Posted by ichiro at 2017-12-14 03:15 AM | Reply

#113
I do not expect government to address, given that these inequalities are an output of how a free society allocates its time, wealth and other resources.

your inclusion of "government" seems strangely superfluous in a description of "free" that is that as in wild animals, not of a civilized society guarding Liberty.

#160 | Posted by ichiro at 2017-12-14 03:31 AM | Reply

Is the American Dream dead?
www.usatoday.com

If the American dream is defined as earning more money than your parents, today's young adults are just as likely to have a nightmare as they are to achieve their dream.

Only 50% of people born in the 1980's are making more than their parents, compared to 90% of children born in 1940, according to a new study by researchers at Stanford University, Harvard University and the University of California-Berkeley.

The study concludes that income inequality is the primary reason why many young people are left behind. Slower rates of economic growth are a secondary factor, according to the findings.


Calling Millennials "entitled" is intellectually lazy.

The evidence is right in front of our noses, and only the myopic toadies for the millionaires and billionaires would argue against the evidence of the growing wealth inequality in America and how it's shaping the POV of Millennials.

#161 | Posted by PinchALoaf at 2017-12-14 07:17 AM | Reply

@ AVIGDORE

You're not very bright.

You could always click on the George Carlin video at the top of the thread and listen to Carlin speak the truth ... or you can choose to remain willfully ignorant.

Your choice.

#163 | Posted by PinchALoaf at 2017-12-14 08:03 AM | Reply

"And how do you figure that? Undermining the plutocrats you now to sounds like the reverse."

Lenin was offering a very similar plan 100 years ago...ask the Soviets how that worked out. And in reality, the Soviets had it pretty good compared to most countries that adopted socialism...at least when the Communist Party wasn't trying to eradicate them.

#165 | Posted by madbomber at 2017-12-14 08:45 AM | Reply

"I'm for reasonable regulation and government playing the role it's supposed in looking out for it's citizens as a whole."

Except you're not...and that's the problem. You're rhetoric demonstrates a disdain for high incomes earners and the belief that you don't think they're entitled to it...even tough it was given freely by society.

Me, on the other hand, I really more concerned with me. And if a process results in me earning a dollar more, even if that same process results in someone else earning a hundred more it's still a win for me. I'm not going to get jealous or pissy because someone else is doing even better.

And so long as you have a free society, you're going to have inequality. Those who have the most to offer are going to benefit the most. Those with little or nothing to offer, they'll get nothing. You prevent this by limiting society's freedom to allocate it's resources in a way that befits each household best. Instead, that becomes the role that government plays.

#166 | Posted by madbomber at 2017-12-14 08:52 AM | Reply

"Link?"

Uh...no. I was way off.

You'd be paying 27% if you were making $38K a year (2017$)...at $470K (2017$, $49,550 in 1951$), your tax rate would have been 60%.

#168 | Posted by madbomber at 2017-12-14 09:05 AM | Reply

"But... I thought they were the ones who paid your fair share?"

They certainly are...all 100 of them or so.

No exact numbers on how many USans made $40 million or more, but we know that there were 72 Americans who made $50 million or more.

#169 | Posted by madbomber at 2017-12-14 09:07 AM | Reply

"What I am advocating are harsher penalties for white collar crime that involves stealing hundreds of millions, and billions, of dollars and wrecking the economy."

So...what actions would you recommend with regards to the folks at Fannie Mae who facilitated a lot of the housing crisis?

I get what you are saying, but you seem a little biased in who you would go after...do the debtors who borrowed beyond their means carry any responsibility? Or is it only the banks who loaned the money guilty?

#170 | Posted by madbomber at 2017-12-14 09:13 AM | Reply

What avigdore fails to understand is that the Republican myth is that poor people are lazy leaches, looking for a handout. Truth is they have worked for every little thing they have and circumstances, often beyond their control, worked against them.

In fact that one percent and one tenth of one percent, that Sanders refers to, do little more than borrow money to make more money, except when they are engaged in insider trading or fraud schemes. The system we live in rewards speculation more than production. This policy will fail because, in the long run, only real production produces new real wealth. Speculation is like musical chairs.

CHIP is already in a death spiral and Ryan has made it clear that following his horrid tax plan, in 2018 he will target "entitlements" including medicare and social security. Bill Clinton was intent on doing the same thing until Lewinsky came along. She saved the 99%, for a while.

These slow, dishonest, attacks on the New Deal and Civil Rights occur slowly and methodically, one group at a time. Today its teachers and their unions. Tomorrow it could be you.

#171 | Posted by bayviking at 2017-12-14 09:13 AM | Reply

"Lenin was offering a very similar plan 100 years ago..."

Posting such utter nonsense should get a vacation. Lenin????? Really stupid? That's just garbage.

#172 | Posted by danni at 2017-12-14 09:14 AM | Reply

So... basically what Madbomber is saying is that the rich are super smart and talented and that their intelligence and skill is commensurate with their compensation. That is why he thinks our country would be screwed if they were gone.

So... Trump makes ~$400 million a year. I am going to assume that Madbomber makes less than $400k per year. So, if my math is write, Madbomber thinks that he is less than 1/1000 as smart, less than 1/1000 as skilled, and less than 1/1000 the person that Donald Trump is. Considering the low bar that Donald Trump is setting, this is PATHETIC (though I can now understand the depravity of a lot of conservative behavior if that is the standard they aspire to).

Is this generally how conservatives think? Are all of their idiotic decisions and the abysmal quality of their candidates just because they have such low self-esteem?

BTW... While I think Obama is an amazing person, I do not think he is significantly more skilled or significantly more intelligent than I am. You may think you are too stupid to interact with these people, but they are people just like everyone else and I would be excited to interact with them and exchange ideas, and have no doubt I could hold my own in an intellectual conversation.

#173 | Posted by gtbritishskull at 2017-12-14 09:15 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

161

Good article. Everybody should read it.

#174 | Posted by eberly at 2017-12-14 09:15 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"CHIP is already in a death spiral and Ryan has made it clear that following his horrid tax plan, in 2018 he will target "entitlements" including medicare and social security"

Ryan is basically saying that it is ok if some children die. And that is not an exaggeration, it's just reality. And Ryan and other Republicans are actually ok with that. They are not humans in my view, they are some subspecies that just don't care about children.

#175 | Posted by danni at 2017-12-14 09:16 AM | Reply

The American dream is dead for millennials. For some reason, their parents or adults in their lives do not set them up for success. Nothing good can come from going 100k in debt for an art history degree. I blame our parents for not explaining what the real world is like and the consequences for amassing such a large debt for a useless piece of paper.

#177 | Posted by Will123 at 2017-12-14 09:18 AM | Reply

What avigdore fails to understand is that the Republican myth is that poor people are lazy leaches, looking for a handout. #171 | Posted by bayviking at 2017-12-14 09:13 AM

Have any citation that led you to that conclusion, or is it just pulled from your fevered imagination?

#178 | Posted by Avigdore at 2017-12-14 09:21 AM | Reply

What avigdore fails to understand is that the Republican myth is that poor people are lazy leaches, looking for a handout. #171 | Posted by bayviking at 2017-12-14 09:13 AM
Have any citation that led you to that conclusion, or is it just pulled from your fevered imagination?

#178 | POSTED BY AVIGDORE

40 years of elections, campaign advertising, floor speeches, radio/television appearances, Congressional voting records, and posters on this site are not enough?

#180 | Posted by Sycophant at 2017-12-14 09:27 AM | Reply

"The American dream is dead for millennials. For some reason, their parents or adults in their lives do not set them up for success."

Another stupid attempt to shift it from a class war to a genrational war. What parent in this country doesn't want SS, Medicare, etc. to still be there for their kids? Now which Republican pawns of the rich have already talked about cutting those programs to pay for tax cuts for the 1%. I don't know if you are just stupid or if you actually work for the Republicans, doesn't matter, either way your comments are repulsive. And when I see them I will call them out for what they are. They are attacks on the working class and you should be ashamed.

#181 | Posted by danni at 2017-12-14 09:35 AM | Reply

40 years of elections, campaign advertising, floor speeches, radio/television appearances, Congressional voting records, and posters on this site are not enough? - #180 | Posted by Sycophant at 2017-12-14 09:27 AM
No, 40 years of elections, campaign advertising, floor speeches, radio/television appearances, Congressional voting records, and posters on this site are not enough to indicate that I don't realize how republicans feel about the poor or that those feelings are based on myth.

#185 | Posted by Avigdore at 2017-12-14 09:39 AM | Reply

Quit pretending to give a crap Avigdore, it makes you look foolish. I'm laughing at you right now!

#188 | Posted by danni at 2017-12-14 09:51 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

@ Avigdore

You are such a childish moron.

When Bill Maher joked that if Trump could prove he wasn't the offspring of an Orange Orangutan he'd pay a million bucks ... and Trump tried to collect ... and the judge threw it out of court for wasting his time over such stupidity.

Take your literal moronacy and go piss up rope.

Literally, moron ... go piss up a rope.

#189 | Posted by PinchALoaf at 2017-12-14 09:56 AM | Reply

"Posting such utter nonsense should get a vacation. Lenin????? Really stupid? That's just garbage."

I betcha there was a good communist who was saying the same thing...way back when.

"So... Trump makes ~$400 million a year. I am going to assume that Madbomber makes less than $400k per year. So, if my math is write, Madbomber thinks that he is less than 1/1000 as smart, less than 1/1000 as skilled, and less than 1/1000 the person that Donald Trump is. Considering the low bar that Donald Trump is setting, this is PATHETIC (though I can now understand the depravity of a lot of conservative behavior if that is the standard they aspire to)."

You're getting too wrapped around the axle on amounts. I don't care what DT makes, because it was given to him willingly in exchange for a good or service. In that respect he's no different than you or I...he simply has more to offer society in return for a paycheck then you or I do. No different than Elon Musk or Honey Boo Boo.

Would seem irate. Would you be equally irate if society decided to abandon DT and stop supporting his various enterprises altogether?

#193 | Posted by madbomber at 2017-12-14 10:26 AM | Reply

"You may think you are too stupid to interact with these people, but they are people just like everyone else and I would be excited to interact with them and exchange ideas, and have no doubt I could hold my own in an intellectual conversation."

That's probably true...but has no bearing on how much one earns. Obama is a former president, and as such can likely draw as much as a million dollars for a single speaking engagement. I don't know that you or I could draw $10. I don't think I could anyway.

#194 | Posted by madbomber at 2017-12-14 10:30 AM | Reply

"You're getting too wrapped around the axle on amounts. I don't care what DT makes, because it was given to him willingly in exchange for a good or service. In that respect he's no different than you or I...he simply has more to offer society in return for a paycheck then you or I do. No different than Elon Musk or Honey Boo Boo."

Comparing Donald Trump to Elon Musk makes you look like Honey Boo Boo. Donald Trump inherited his wealth, let's not kid ourselves, he's no genius.

#197 | Posted by danni at 2017-12-14 11:13 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

"even tough it was given freely by society."

Again, when did society become free?
1865, 1965, when?

#200 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-12-14 12:11 PM | Reply

"I don't care what DT makes, because it was given to him willingly in exchange for a good or service."

Except it wasn't.

Meager Presidential salary asude, Trump's money was inherited from his father, who got it in part via unlawful real estate and landlord activities.

You believe that voluntarism launders money. Including Trump's present day Russian money laundering business.

#201 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-12-14 12:16 PM | Reply

Getting caught means you're going to a pound-me-in-the-ass prison ... no more country club spa retreat prison time anymore -- don't drop the soap, dope. - #112 | Posted by PinchALoaf at 2017-12-13 07:50 PM.

#199 | POSTED BY AVIGDORE

You are such a childish moron.

When Bill Maher joked that if Trump could prove he wasn't the offspring of an Orange Orangutan he'd pay a million bucks ... and Trump tried to collect ... and the judge threw it out of court for wasting his time over such stupidity.

Take your literal moronacy and go piss up rope.

Literally, moron ... go piss up a rope.

After you're done pissing up a rope, troll, you can go troll somewhere else.

#202 | Posted by PinchALoaf at 2017-12-14 12:17 PM | Reply

"For some reason, their parents or adults in their lives do not set them up for success."

What do you mean, "For some reason?"

The reason is obvious.

In 1975, the parents and adults in their lives decided that practically all the gains in household income should go to the top 20% of households.

That's the reason most kids won't be doing better than their parents. They're not supposed to.

#203 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-12-14 12:23 PM | Reply

Have you actually not seen the movie Office Space, young man?

#207 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-12-14 12:35 PM | Reply

I'm of the opinion that your cultural illiteracy has not served you well.

#209 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-12-14 12:52 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"Comparing Donald Trump to Elon Musk makes you look like Honey Boo Boo. Donald Trump inherited his wealth, let's not kid ourselves, he's no genius."

Donald trump is a reality TV star in a country that idolizes reality TV stars. He's where he is today as a result of his celebrity status. [...]

#210 | Posted by madbomber at 2017-12-14 12:54 PM | Reply

So... MythBomber is the pale Boaz?

Why does that make so much sense?

#212 | Posted by Corky at 2017-12-14 01:08 PM | Reply

"Donald trump is a reality TV star in a country that idolizes reality TV stars. He's where he is today as a result of his celebrity status.[...]...says Bernie...
Still though, that's exactly what's happening. They're doing better."

Your entire post seems to be an expression of disdain for America. I might even agree with you but I'm surprised that you would make such a cynical post and I'd like a link to that quote by Bernie, I do not believe he ever said such a thing.

#213 | Posted by danni at 2017-12-14 01:11 PM | Reply

"You fantasize about being a libertarian voluntarist, while in reality you wear the uniform, while living off and even educating yourself through taxpayer largesse."

I have older brothers who can't seem to stop patting themselves on the back for the free educations they got wile applauding Trump today. Needless to say, we are hardly close.

#214 | Posted by danni at 2017-12-14 01:13 PM | Reply

"You seem to be struggling to distinguish fantasy from reality..."

I guess I'm just not feelin' the Bern...

"I might even agree with you but I'm surprised that you would make such a cynical post and I'd like a link to that quote by Bernie, I do not believe he ever said such a thing."

"www.npr.org"

"I have older brothers who can't seem to stop patting themselves on the back for the free educations they got wile applauding Trump today..."3

They got a free education??? Did Mumsy and Da pay for it?

#215 | Posted by madbomber at 2017-12-14 01:20 PM | Reply

Donald trump is a reality TV star in a country that idolizes reality TV stars. He's where he is today as a result of his celebrity status.

It's not bad enough that the US did not learn last time they elected a celebrity and what he did to the structure of the United States but it seems that this time, the GOP decided that Reagan was not bad or crazy enough for the US and they decided to dredge the bottom to the cesspool even deeper.

They gambled that a narcissistic compulsively lying sociopath could tell everyone exactly what they wanted to hear and that no one would bother to notice that one days speech was 180 degrees opposite of the previous. The GOP saw that the voting public were desperate ignorant children that would gladly ignore a candidates history in exchange for the comfort of him telling them what they wanted to hear.

The American dream is not dead if you are lucky enough to be born to the 1%, but for the rest of us the GOP sure is trying really hard to strangle it out.

Look no further than the policies...

Taking 80% of a national park and preparing to hand it over to uranium miners.
Taking arctic wildlife refuge and handing it over to oil drillers.
Handing control of internet access to conglomerate ISPs.
Saying the "air is too clean for the public to be healthy".
Masquerading a tax cut of 85% to the 1% as a big gift for everyone, creating massive deficits in the process and then will use the deficits they created as a reason to gut social security and medicare.

There's a gift coming for the middle class.... bend over and take is the GOP's message.

#216 | Posted by 726 at 2017-12-14 01:23 PM | Reply

Donald Trump inherited his wealth, let's not kid ourselves, he's no genius.

#197 | Posted by danni at 2017-12-14 11:13 AM | Reply | Flag:

Trump, if he did nothing with his money other than invest in an index fund, would be significantly wealthier than he is now.

That's the genius that the right idolizes.

#217 | Posted by 726 at 2017-12-14 01:26 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"I don't care what DT makes, because it was given to him willingly in exchange for a good or service."

Still perpetuating that myth, huh?

#218 | Posted by DirkStruan at 2017-12-14 01:27 PM | Reply

"They got a free education??? Did Mumsy and Da pay for it?"

As opposed to your Uncle Sam, you damned hypocrite?

#219 | Posted by DirkStruan at 2017-12-14 01:30 PM | Reply

"They got a free education??? Did Mumsy and Da pay for it?"

Back before Reagan tuition was free in California state universities.

#220 | Posted by danni at 2017-12-14 01:31 PM | Reply

"They got a free education??? Did Mumsy and Da pay for it?"

Who paid for your education?

Uncle Joe, or Uncle Sam, same difference right?

#221 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-12-14 01:32 PM | Reply

"They got a free education??? Did Mumsy and Da pay for it?"

So what if they did?
If it happened voluntarily, you are fine with it, right?
So what exactly is the point of your question?
You're trying to play the class warfare card, right?
Just one problem, you think the class war is a sham...

#222 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-12-14 01:38 PM | Reply

"The American dream is not dead if you are lucky enough to be born to the 1%, but for the rest of us the GOP sure is trying really hard to strangle it out."

It makes a good bumper sticker, but that's about it. The numbers don't lie, and what the numbers tell us is that, writ large, the US is doing better than ever.

"Trump, if he did nothing with his money other than invest in an index fund, would be significantly wealthier than he is now."

Trump is president right now because of his status as a reality TV personality. I don't think he will be the last, either.

"As opposed to your Uncle Sam, you damned hypocrite?"

???

My education wasn't free.

#223 | Posted by madbomber at 2017-12-14 01:59 PM | Reply

"It makes a good bumper sticker, but that's about it. The numbers don't lie, and what the numbers tell us is that, writ large, the US is doing better than ever."

Note, dear reader, his use of the collective "writ large, the US." Of course when the wealthy are throwing off the curve, one can make all sorts of rosy pronouncements like that...

#224 | Posted by DirkStruan at 2017-12-14 02:04 PM | Reply

My education wasn't free.

#223 | POSTED BY MADBOMBER AT 2017-12-14 01:59 PM | FLAG:

And this is where he starts quibbling.

#225 | Posted by DirkStruan at 2017-12-14 02:06 PM | Reply

"And this is where he starts quibbling."

Merely pointing out a fact.

#226 | Posted by madbomber at 2017-12-14 02:10 PM | Reply

icky, icky, facts.

#227 | Posted by madbomber at 2017-12-14 02:13 PM | Reply

"The numbers don't lie, and what the numbers tell us is that, writ large, the US is doing better than ever."

What about these numbers:

"In 1980, the top 1 percent controlled about 8 percent of U.S. national income.
The bottom 50 percent shared about 18 percent.

Today the top 1 percent share about 20 percent; the bottom 50 percent, just 12 percent."

It's clearly not getting better for the bottom half.

The bottom half's share of the pie is only two-thirds what it used to be. The top 1℅ share more than doubled.

#228 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-12-14 02:16 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

- The top 1℅ share more than doubled.

As long as they keep promising to Tinkle Down on the MBs of the world, their relatively poor, and getting poorer, rwing proxies will keep supporting them... even when it never happens.

They are like Lucy always teeing up the financial football for MB Brown, and then always pulling it away.

#229 | Posted by Corky at 2017-12-14 02:20 PM | Reply

"My education wasn't free"

Especially not for the taxpayers!

#230 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-12-14 02:26 PM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 2

"The bottom half's share of the pie is only two-thirds what it used to be. The top 1℅ share more than doubled."

And what's your point?

We know that incomes for the bottom half aren't declining...those have gone up. Median household wealth my have declined ever so slightly for the bottom quintile, but it's increased for the rest.

And we've been over this...what, a hundred time now? The increase for to income earners is because that's wealth they played a role in creating. Why would you expect those who payed no part to somehow benefit from that process?

#231 | Posted by madbomber at 2017-12-14 02:37 PM | Reply

"My education wasn't free." - #223 | Posted by madbomber at 2017-12-14 01:59 PM

Then you should ask for a 100% refund.

#232 | Posted by Hans at 2017-12-14 02:43 PM | Reply | Funny: 2

"We know that incomes for the bottom half aren't declining."

Their share is dwindling.

How small a slice of the pie is too little to sustain the economy for the bottom half?

Unless you can answer that, I don't see how you can say their situation is improving.

#233 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-12-14 02:59 PM | Reply

"The bottom half's share of the pie is only two-thirds what it used to be. The top 1℅ share more than doubled."
And what's your point?

Our economy is not zero-sum game where if someone gains another must lose. New wealth is being created on a regular basis.

#234 | Posted by MSgt at 2017-12-14 03:01 PM | Reply

"The increase for to income earners is because that's wealth they played a role in creating."

No its not.

Productivity is up, but income for all but the top tier are not up nearly as much.

#235 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-12-14 03:02 PM | Reply

"Our economy is not zero-sum game where if someone gains another must lose."

So then whats your explanation for has the bottom half lost a third of the pie, compared to what they had forty years ago, while the 1℅ more than doubled their share? Looks pretty zero sum to me. Wages not keeping up with profits is a loss for the worker; an equal gain for the owner.

There are plenty of zero sum games in our economy. Ever paid any bank fees?

Money doesn't care if it was created or redistributed. It all spends the same.

#236 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-12-14 03:21 PM | Reply

Our economy is not zero-sum game where if someone gains another must lose. New wealth is being created on a regular basis.

#234 | Posted by MSgt

You mean it's not ALWAYS a zero sum game. Sometimes it is.

When you blow up the deficit to give tax cuts to the rich, then fix the deficit by cutting services for the poor, someone is losing because someone else is gaining.

For example trumps kids gain hundreds of millions from the elimination of the estate tax, and that is paid for by things like eliminating the medical expense deduction, without which my sick broke mother will lose 15k a year and maybe her house. She is losing so the trumps can gain.

#237 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2017-12-14 03:22 PM | Reply

"Our economy is not zero-sum game where if someone gains another must lose. New wealth is being created on a regular basis.
#234 | Posted by MSgt "

That is a myth that the wealthy believe because reality would bother their consciences.

#238 | Posted by danni at 2017-12-14 03:25 PM | Reply

"We know that incomes for the bottom half aren't declining."

But for most, rents are rising.

#239 | Posted by danni at 2017-12-14 03:26 PM | Reply

Conservatives are approaching a point in time when they will not openly say the things they do now. It will be too dangerous.

#240 | Posted by danni at 2017-12-14 03:27 PM | Reply

But for most, rents are rising.

#239 | POSTED BY DANNI AT 2017-12-14 03:26 PM | REPLY | FL

And healthcare costs, and food prices, and gas prices, and on and on.

#241 | Posted by DirkStruan at 2017-12-14 04:16 PM | Reply

Hey Docnjo, is rent a zero sum game?
LOL.

#242 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-12-14 04:25 PM | Reply

"Their share is dwindling."

That's somewhat misleading.

As a whole, that's true, but in absolute numbers, their share is still increasing...

"How small a slice of the pie is too little to sustain the economy for the bottom half?"

The actual percentage of the pie isn't really relevant. But feel free to get back to me when you start to see a consistent, measurable decline in incomes.

"So then whats your explanation for has the bottom half lost a third of the pie, compared to what they had forty years ago, while the 1℅ more than doubled their share? Looks pretty zero sum to me."

They haven't lost anything...nor have the creating anything. Unless they were participating in those activities that were creating new wealth, I'm not sure why you would expect to see the numbers increase.

"Productivity is up, but income for all but the top tier are not up nearly as much."

When a company upgrades a piece of equipment that allows a worker to go from producing 10 widgets per hour to producing 100 widgets per hour, measurable productivity will go up. But it's not the result of the worker doing a better job...it's the result of the company investing in a technology. So why would you expect the worker would reap the benefit of capital investment. The worker is not doing anything different than they were before the upgrade.

#243 | Posted by madbomber at 2017-12-14 04:26 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"Conservatives are approaching a point in time when they will not openly say the things they do now. It will be too dangerous."

Still waiting for the day you can put on your jack boots and crush skulls, I see.

"And healthcare costs, and food prices, and gas prices, and on and on."

Healthcare...yes. Education...yes.

Everything else...not a chance.

#244 | Posted by madbomber at 2017-12-14 04:28 PM | Reply

But feel free to get back to me when you start to see a consistent, measurable decline in incomes.

#243 | POSTED BY MADBOMBER

I'm getting back to you because we've seen a consistent and measurable decline in incomes (relative to buying power) over the last 40 years.

#245 | Posted by Sycophant at 2017-12-14 04:35 PM | Reply

"But feel free to get back to me when you start to see a consistent, measurable decline in incomes."

Millennials on line 2, MadB.

They say their incomes are in decline compared to their parents, which is the opposite of the American Dream.

#246 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-12-14 04:39 PM | Reply

"Still waiting for the day you can put on your jack boots and crush skulls, I see."

Who'd know more about that than you, you imperialist goon?

#247 | Posted by DirkStruan at 2017-12-14 04:42 PM | Reply

The actual percentage of the pie isn't really relevant. But feel free to get back to me when you start to see a consistent, measurable decline in incomes.

#243 | Posted by madbomber at 2017-12-14 04:26 PM | Reply | Flag:

That's irrelevent when we've seen a consistent measurable decline in lifestyle. A single middle class job used to be enough to afford a home, support a spouse, and put a couple kids through college. Now that can't even be done on TWO incomes.

Slowly increasing incomes are drowned out by rapidly increasing housing, healthcare, and education costs.

#248 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2017-12-14 04:45 PM | Reply

"I'm getting back to you because we've seen a consistent and measurable decline in incomes (relative to buying power) over the last 40 years."

Are we really going to rehash this ---- again?

With the exception of healthcare and education, things are less expensive today. In many, many cases, far less expensive. My dollar goes further today that at perhaps any point in history, and I'm not alone. 40 years ago, had I been able to afford a computer, I would have owned one. Today I have a laptop, I'm in the market for a new laptop, and a desktop. My wife has two laptops. My youngest daughter has an all-in-one, and my oldest has a laptop. Collectively, all cost less than $6K.

You're narrative is a myth. You're being conned. I wish you were able to at least apply enough critical thought to realize this. And it's not that you can't want to change inequality, or offer a broader spectrum of social services. But you're belief that you would have these things if it weren't for rich people is ridiculous, and it really precludes the possibility of any meaningful discussion. You may as well blame the rich for bad weather or acne. And I'm sure someone somewhere is.

#249 | Posted by madbomber at 2017-12-14 04:47 PM | Reply

"A single middle class job used to be enough to afford a home, support a spouse, and put a couple kids through college. Now that can't even be done on TWO incomes."

It still is...but I'm guessing when you say middle-class, you mean someone working in an unskilled or low skilled labor position. Like in an auto factory or some other form of heavy industry. in the post-war years, when Europe and Asia were still largely undeveloped, there was a huge demand for unskilled labor to work in factories. That declined once Europe and Asia rebuilt. In 1975, a line worker in an auto factory could make up to $60K a year (2017$). That's more than a lot of professional workers earn today.

#250 | Posted by madbomber at 2017-12-14 04:56 PM | Reply

"They say their incomes are in decline compared to their parents, which is the opposite of the American Dream."

Which could be the case on an individual level. If your dad was a doctor and you're a barista, you're not going to do as well. If your dad was a factory worker and you're a factory worker, you're not going to do as well. But if you're dad was a civil engineer, and you're a civil engineer, you're going to do better than dad did. And if you're dad was a factory worker, you're probably going to do better with almost any degree.

#251 | Posted by madbomber at 2017-12-14 04:58 PM | Reply

With the exception of healthcare and education, things are less expensive today. In many, many cases, far less expensive. My dollar goes further today that at perhaps any point in history, and I'm not alone. 40 years ago, had I been able to afford a computer, I would have owned one. Today I have a laptop, I'm in the market for a new laptop, and a desktop. My wife has two laptops. My youngest daughter has an all-in-one, and my oldest has a laptop. Collectively, all cost less than $6K.

#249 | Posted by madbomber

Why do you always cite the ability to buy cheap disposable crap as evidence that the middle class is fine?

If you can't afford a house, college, or to get sick, then you're not doing fine.

#252 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2017-12-14 05:04 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

"If your dad was a doctor and you're a barista, you're not going to do as well."

That's a ---- example because you're comparing a top tier job with a bottom tier job.
And even then, you might do just as well, since you will have your daddy's money to help you do well. If Trump is any example.

The real world situation is more like this:
Your dad worked at the plant, and now the plant is gone.
Your dad got the GI Bill, but now the GI Bill is watered down.
Your dad got a pension, now the same job doesn't have a pension.

I even saw this with my contract at the supermarket. The people who had worked there for years got time and a half on Sunday, that went to time and a third, and by the time I got hired, under my contract it was just an extra dollar an hour.

Notice how that's also a zero sum game; those wages that don't get paid just become more profits for the owners.

#253 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-12-14 05:10 PM | Reply

You have a toothbrush, don't you? Then what are you complaining about Mr CEO?!

#254 | Posted by BruceBanner at 2017-12-14 05:11 PM | Reply

"Why do you always cite the ability to buy cheap disposable crap as evidence that the middle class is fine?"

The point is that once upon a time, it wasn't cheap, disposable crap. It only is now because competition has created that environment. Why do you think that there are no longer TV repair shops anywhere, or vacuum repairmen. Now you just throw that stuff away...it would be more expensive to try and fix it.

As for housing...How many times do I need to point out that, per square foot, housing prices remain virtually unchanged. I know I've shown you the math at least twice. Is it just too much a ----- in your faith to acknowledge the fact?

#255 | Posted by madbomber at 2017-12-14 05:11 PM | Reply

"If your dad was a factory worker and you're a factory worker, you're not going to do as well."

No ----, Sherlock.
So stop saying the dream is alive, because it's not.

"And if you're dad was a factory worker, you're probably going to do better with almost any degree."

Yeah, but only about a third of Americans gets a degree.
So again, you're picking the small wins and pretending they're representative, when they plainly aren't.

Stop lying so much. You're not even a Trump supporter, why the constant lying?

#256 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-12-14 05:12 PM | Reply

"Your dad got the GI Bill, but now the GI Bill is watered down."

The post 9/11 GI Bill is far superior to the Montgomery GI Bill that preceded it.

"The people who had worked there for years got time and a half on Sunday, that went to time and a third, and by the time I got hired, under my contract it was just an extra dollar an hour."

And under my contract I get no overtime...so why should I care about this? Why would any of the tens of millions who don't get overtimes care about this?

"Notice how that's also a zero sum game; those wages that don't get paid just become more profits for the owners."

Or they get passed on to the customer...a model perfected by Wal Mart. Which is why WMT has so many loyal customers.

#257 | Posted by madbomber at 2017-12-14 05:15 PM | Reply

"How many times do I need to point out that, per square foot, housing prices remain virtually unchanged"

So they found a way to make housing cost more, by making houses larger, even as family sizes decline.

That... doesn't make housing cost less.

#258 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-12-14 05:16 PM | Reply

"The post 9/11 GI Bill is far superior to the Montgomery GI Bill that preceded it."

The Post 9/11 GI Bill is not the GI Bill of today.

#259 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-12-14 05:17 PM | Reply

"Yeah, but only about a third of Americans gets a degree."

And therein lies the problem...unless you consider it the duty of those who earned college degrees to fund the lifestyle of those who didn't.

Stop lying so much. You're not even a Trump supporter, why the constant lying?"

Says the person lying about how life for lower income earners is declining.

Why the constant lying, Snoofy?

#260 | Posted by madbomber at 2017-12-14 05:17 PM | Reply

The Post 9/11 GI Bill is not the GI Bill of today. #259 | POSTED BY SNOOFY

Oh, really?...

#261 | Posted by GOnoles92 at 2017-12-14 05:18 PM | Reply

"And therein lies the problem."

Wait, there's a problem?
I thought everyone was doing great; the best ever.
Make up your mind.

#262 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-12-14 05:19 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"The Post 9/11 GI Bill is not the GI Bill of today."

Yes, ------, it is.

Please stop lying.

#263 | Posted by madbomber at 2017-12-14 05:20 PM | Reply

#261
www.military.com
First sentence, written six years ago:
"The Post-9/11 GI Bill has evolved quite a bit over the last few years."
Try not to lie so much, okay?

#264 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-12-14 05:20 PM | Reply

"Wait, there's a problem?"

Well...I don't think it is a problem. I don't really care. But it is the root cause of what you seem to perceive as being a problem.

#265 | Posted by madbomber at 2017-12-14 05:21 PM | Reply

If in 2017 you go to join the military, and you elect to participate in the GI Bill program, you will receive the Post 9/11 GI Bill...a benefit far superior to the Montgomery GI Bill that your dad would have gone to college on.

Screw it...lie if you want to. You seem a miserable enough creature that you should be entitled to whatever shred of happiness you're able to scrape out.

#266 | Posted by madbomber at 2017-12-14 05:25 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

The Post 9/11 GI Bill is not the GI Bill of today. #259 | POSTED BY SNOOFY

The GI Bill of today is the Post 9/11 GI Bill.
&
You can elect to get the MGIB as well, for whatever reason, but it will cost $1.2k in payroll deductions over 12mons.

#267 | Posted by GOnoles92 at 2017-12-14 05:29 PM | Reply

If it weren't for poor people bribing Congress to make laws that benefit them, MB could be a happy man.

The entire 94th MythBomber Squad would be happy.

#268 | Posted by Corky at 2017-12-14 05:31 PM | Reply

"What is different about us as individuals compared to previous generations is minor. What is different about the world around us is profound. Salaries have stagnated and entire sectors have cratered. At the same time, the cost of every prerequisite of a secure existence -- education, housing and health care -- has inflated into the stratosphere. From job security to the social safety net, all the structures that insulate us from ruin are eroding. And the opportunities leading to a middle-class life -- the ones that boomers lucked into -- are being lifted out of our reach. Add it all up and it's no surprise that we're the first generation in modern history to end up poorer than our parents." highline.huffingtonpost.com

#269 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-12-14 05:32 PM | Reply

"Well...I don't think it is a problem. I don't really care."

For someone who doesn't really care, you spend an inordinate amount of time trying to convince us not to care too.

I think you do care. I think you think that it's better for America when there are more poor people barely getting by. After all, you keep saying America is doing the best it ever has, as the top tier gets richer and richer and the bottom tier stagnates.

#270 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-12-14 05:34 PM | Reply

"Q: Ron I was curious, what are the differences between MGIB and Post-9/11 GI Bill? How would you know if one's eligible? I want to attend school in Nevada, how would I know if I can get the BAH or not within my GI Bill?

A: All great questions! First, there are several differences between the Montgomery GI Bill (MGIB) and the Post 9/11 GI Bill. The major difference is what each will pay. The Post 9/11 GI Bill primarily pays for degree-producing courses, whereas the MGIB pays for the same thing, but it also includes, trade, technical, license and certification courses.

The other big difference is how they pay. The MGIB pays the student $1,426 per month to go to school and the student has to pay tuition, fees, books and all education-related expenses. Under the Post 9/11 GI Bill, the VA pays the school directly for tuition and fees (up to the in-state maximum) and the student receives a monthly housing allowance (not BAH) and a book stipend of up to $1,000 per year." www.armystudyguide.com

So the Post 9/11 GI Bill covers less education, and it doesn't pay the student directly, but uses the student as a pass-through to funnel public money into the education system.

And this is supposedly better? For whom, the universities?

#271 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-12-14 05:37 PM | Reply

"With the exception of healthcare and education, things are less expensive today. "

Oh, so two of the largest expenses cost more today.

Let's not forget, houses aren't less expensive today either. So there's a third expense, and a very large one, that costs more today. As you love to point out, houses might cost the same per square foot, but the actual cost of the house as measured by the person living in it is higher, because the house itself is also larger. (And, occupied by a smaller family, so what do they need more square feet for?)

Meanwhile, you've identified education as one of the things needed to be as successful as your parents -- even if your parents didn't have an education!

So, it costs more to be successful now; the house costs more, health care costs more, plus you have to add in the price of a college education.

The American Dream has been priced out of reach of, I dunno, roughly half of Americans.

#272 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-12-14 06:21 PM | Reply

"And this is supposedly better? For whom, the universities?"

Absolutely none of what you said makes any sense at all.

The Post 9/11 GI Bill provides far more in benefits, doesn't cost the user anything, and is even transferrable to dependents if the user wants to do that. AND if that's not enough, you can still use the Montgomery GI Bill (a much updated and improved version) if you choose to do so.

Fortunately Snoof, this is not something you'll ever need to concern yourself with. You'll need to keep waiting for a government that's going to make taxpayers give you ---- for free.

Don't hold your breath.

#274 | Posted by madbomber at 2017-12-15 10:27 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"As you love to point out, houses might cost the same per square foot, but the actual cost of the house as measured by the person living in it is higher, because the house itself is also larger."

That's a lifestyle choice. It's like saying that cars are more expensive because you choose to buy an Escalade over a Nissan Sentra.

And just for fun, I did Trulia search for houses under 1200 square foot. I got a lot of hits...many at price points well under $90 s/ft, meaning that it would cost less today in adjusted dollars, far less, than in the 1950s.

#275 | Posted by madbomber at 2017-12-15 10:33 AM | Reply

"The American Dream has been priced out of reach of, I dunno, roughly half of Americans."

The American Dream has been priced out of reach for people who expect someone else to pay the bill. But that's something that hasn't changed. What has changed is the expectation by people like you and the Bernie Disciples, where drawing breath alone entitles you to being provided with the goods and services represented in the "American Dream".

#276 | Posted by madbomber at 2017-12-15 10:35 AM | Reply

"The American Dream has been priced out of reach for people who expect someone else to pay the bill."

The GI Bill = someone else paying the bill, dumbass.

#277 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-12-15 01:10 PM | Reply

#276 | Posted by madbomber, Sorry but the American dream was always just that, an aspiration. Basicly owning your own home and having a retirement which prevented you from being dependent was about as good as it got. Individuals who applied themselves could achieve that level of security, and most, more than half did. I'll take my grand dad as an example. Born on a cotton farm, married at 16 to a 14 year old, had two kids before he was twenty. His dad had land, but his mom died when he was three and his step mom apparently less than affectionate. His dad died in the flu epidemic in 1917. My dad was born in a lumber camp, my uncles were born in shotgun share cropper quarters. Big difference, granddad required his boys to go to school, school or they paid rent. One became a cop for a while, his son became the Chief of Police in San Francisco. One became a machinist for Bell, his son became the photographer for that corporation. One went into teaching, then into civil service retiring as an executive for civilian personnel. Grand dad moved in from the cotton patch and bought a house in town in 1948, he was 45 before he had indoor plumbing. It wasn't much, but that was quite an achievement for a cotton patch kid. We do the best we can with the opportunities and resources available. Now on the inverse we are over run with people who believe that what they need, they have a right to, food housing and medical care, and to get this by force. I consider those to be our future slaves. The current conflict can be reduced to the makers vs. the takers. Little warning for the Left, the makers invariably win.

#278 | Posted by docnjo at 2017-12-15 01:20 PM | Reply

"The current conflict can be reduced to the makers vs. the takers. Little warning for the Left, the makers invariably win."

Life is not an Ayn Rand novel, alas for cretins like you.

#279 | Posted by DirkStruan at 2017-12-15 01:28 PM | Reply

"We do the best we can with the opportunities and resources available."

You somehow think people still don't do this?

I think they do. I think the resources and opportunities are not as accessible as they used to be. As MadB points out, so many people not going to college is a "problem." It wasn't a problem for the Baby Boomers though.

Health care costs astronomically more than in days gone by. Oh, and so has college, which used to not be nearly such a requirement to achieving the American Dream. People are being priced out. A way for them not to be priced out is... to pay them more. But it seems most people who employ labor don't think their laborers should be paid enough to achieve the dream. Labor doesn't have much choice but to take what's being offered, especially since the rich have amassed so much wealth, they could survive without the services of labor until a good many of the laborers simply starve to death.

#280 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-12-15 01:32 PM | Reply

278

Good story. It's amazing how someone can miss the point entirely and vomit "ayn rand" as some sort of retort.

#281 | Posted by eberly at 2017-12-15 01:33 PM | Reply

- the laborers simply starve to death.

Just the cost of doing bidness in Rwinger World.

#282 | Posted by Corky at 2017-12-15 01:34 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"But it seems most people who employ labor don't think their laborers should be paid enough to achieve the dream"

An individual employer isn't going to pay more than the market price for labor. The price for Labor is a commodity.

Surely, if you had a job, you'd understand this.

#283 | Posted by eberly at 2017-12-15 01:36 PM | Reply

"Good story."

I'll bet you particularly liked the ending:

"I consider those to be our future slaves."

#284 | Posted by DirkStruan at 2017-12-15 01:38 PM | Reply

"I consider those to be our future slaves."

So your plan to liberate them is to not give them health care?

"Freedom's just another word for nothin' left to lose."

#285 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-12-15 01:39 PM | Reply

- the laborers simply starve to death.
Just the cost of doing bidness in Rwinger World.
#282 | POSTED BY CORKY AT 2017-12-15 01:34 PM | FLAG:

And why not? There are always more workers.

#286 | Posted by DirkStruan at 2017-12-15 01:41 PM | Reply

"An individual employer isn't going to pay more than the market price for labor."

More and more, employers make capital expenditures which curb the need for labor, which in turn reduces demand, and thus lowers labor prices.

#287 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-12-15 01:42 PM | Reply

"It's amazing how someone can miss the point entirely"

The point was... fictional. We didn't miss it, we're pointing out why it's wrong.

#288 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-12-15 01:44 PM | Reply

#288 | Posted by snoofy, Culturally the great difference between Europe and America is the European's surf mentality. Surfs were basically slaves, but their land lord had a few obligations, provide security from armed incursion and food during famine. For that they went to worship as they were told and the give a lions share of their production to the land lord. A serf had to be perpetually dependent to authority, both church and state. Independence is an American trait not shared with most Europeans.
#285 | Posted by snoofy No, I think the most despotic potential is one where the state controls where you live, what you eat and how much, and what quality of medical care you receive. What the state provides, the state controls.

#289 | Posted by docnjo at 2017-12-15 02:24 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

What the state provides, the state controls.

#289 | POSTED BY DOCNJO AT 2017-12-15 02:24 PM | FLAG: NOTEWORTHY

#290 | Posted by MSgt at 2017-12-15 02:46 PM | Reply

"The GI Bill = someone else paying the bill, dumbass."

The GI Bill is a benefit given in return for providing a service. I guess it would have been more accurate to reference a different party paying the bill in return for nothing at all.

"I think they do. I think the resources and opportunities are not as accessible as they used to be. As MadB points out, so many people not going to college is a "problem." It wasn't a problem for the Baby Boomers though."

It wasn't a problem for the baby boomers because they didn't need an education in order to gain a high income.

"Surely, if you had a job, you'd understand this."

You understand who you're talking to, right? Is there something you've seen in Snoofy to suggest he's ever make a good employee?

#291 | Posted by madbomber at 2017-12-15 03:20 PM | Reply

"The GI Bill is a benefit given in return for providing a service."

Whatever. It's a handout. It's a handout you think people ought to be able to get; a fair return for what they've given.

Who pays for that handout?

#292 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-12-15 03:21 PM | Reply

"What the state provides, the state controls."

And so long as the "right" people are in control, few progressives have a serious problem with that.

In reality, without that strong, coercive government, progressive economic goal would be virtually unachievable in this country.

#293 | Posted by madbomber at 2017-12-15 03:22 PM | Reply

"Whatever. It's a handout. It's a handout you think people ought to be able to get; a fair return for what they've given."

The GI Bill is a benefit provided to veterans in return for military service. It would be a handout if it were given away for nothing.

Kinda like you contributing your labor in return for a wage, or you contributing your labor for nothing.

#294 | Posted by madbomber at 2017-12-15 03:24 PM | Reply

"It wasn't a problem for the baby boomers because they didn't need an education in order to gain a high income."

Indeed.
The rules of the game have changed.
Under the new rules, a much smaller percentage of young Americans will achieve the American Dream compared to past generations.
Another result is that, for those who do, they will likely enjoy much greater success than those who succeeded in previous generations.
This is evident from the fact that "Since 1975, practically all the gains in household income have gone to the top 20% of households."

#295 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-12-15 03:24 PM | Reply

"The GI Bill is a benefit provided to veterans in return for military service."

Right, a handout.

#296 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-12-15 03:25 PM | Reply

"It would be a handout if it were given away for nothing."

Who pays, did you figure out who pays for the handout yet?

#297 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-12-15 03:25 PM | Reply

"What the state provides, the state controls."

So the state provides you the right to bear arms, does the state control guns then?

#298 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-12-15 03:26 PM | Reply

The state provides you with a trial by jury, does the state control the jury?

#299 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-12-15 03:26 PM | Reply

"Culturally the great difference between Europe and America is the European's surf mentality. Surfs were basically slaves, but their land lord had a few obligations, provide security from armed incursion and food during famine. "

You just described sharecroppers.

In the teaching of the American Myth, our poor are not referred to as "peasants." Instead they are called "settlers." You seem to have fallen for the ruse.

#300 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-12-15 03:34 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Also, Culturally, America has very deep and predominantly European roots.
What's that language you think should be the official national language of America?
It's called English, right? England, as in, part of Europe.

#301 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-12-15 03:35 PM | Reply

"Who pays, did you figure out who pays for the handout yet?"

Wouldn't you consider it a handout as well if military personnel served without being compensated for the service?

"So the state provides you the right to bear arms, does the state control guns then?"

Per the constitution, the state has no say in it.

#302 | Posted by madbomber at 2017-12-15 03:38 PM | Reply

"In reality, without that strong, coercive government, progressive economic goal would be virtually unachievable in this country."

And we could still be living in the Depression of 1929.

#303 | Posted by danni at 2017-12-15 03:38 PM | Reply

300 | Posted by snoofy, Settling is a chose, individuals could take that option and many enterprising people did so. The key was land, If an individual could claim it, work it and stay creating markets and ownership/capital, which was preferable to working for others as a tenet farmer. These people had so little cash, they created credit cards. Some failed but many succeed. As I remember Lincoln's grandfather was killed by an angry native in Ohio about 1795 or so. The choose had it's risks. Not any risk involved in staying a serf. Expect more of the same.

#304 | Posted by docnjo at 2017-12-15 03:54 PM | Reply

"...is the European's surf mentality." - #289 | Posted by docnjo at 2017-12-15 02:24 PM

Didn't realize Europe had a surf mentality. That's real gnarly, dude.

♫ Catch a wave and you're sittin' on top of the world. ♫

#305 | Posted by Hans at 2017-12-15 04:01 PM | Reply

"Wouldn't you consider it a handout as well if military personnel served without being compensated for the service?"

I'd consider that slavery.

But the military gets paid. The GI Bill is a benefit above and beyond the pay. It's also a great reason to join. Had the military not been so heterosexist when I was a young man, I might have taken their very generous offer.

#306 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-12-15 04:02 PM | Reply

"Not any risk involved in staying a serf."

So let's say you take some risks, and you fail.
Now what?

#307 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-12-15 04:26 PM | Reply

"Surfs were basically slaves, but their land lord had a few obligations, provide security from armed incursion and food during famine."

So what obligations do the landlords have today?
They certainly don't protect us from armed incursion.
Nor do they provide food during famine.
I guess you'd rather not have the government do those things either?

Why'd you join the military Boaz, was it for the GI Bill?

#308 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-12-15 04:28 PM | Reply

Boaz? Close enough.

#309 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-12-15 04:28 PM | Reply

Had the military not been so heterosexist when I was a young man, I might have taken their very generous offer. #306 | POSTED BY SNOOFY

Interesting revelation, there.

#310 | Posted by GOnoles92 at 2017-12-15 05:19 PM | Reply

"We didn't miss it, we're pointing out why it's wrong."

That proves you missed it.

It's sucks and everyone knows it. But you are still stuck wanting to lecture people on the morality of labor prices.

It's been the same game forever.

#311 | Posted by eberly at 2017-12-15 08:19 PM | Reply

"It's sucks and everyone knows it. But you are still stuck wanting to lecture people on the morality of labor prices. "

Right, that's because the reason it sucks is wages haven't kept up with productivity.

If people were making ever more money in all sectors of the economy, not just the top tier, things, well, they wouldn't be so sucky, now would they?

That's not morality, that's Econ 101. Which means, it actually is morality for Madbomber...

#312 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-12-15 08:27 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"It's been the same game forever."

Something has changed, since 1975.
You know what it is, too.
It hasn't been the same forever.
You lie.

#313 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-12-15 08:28 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2018 World Readable

Drudge Retort