|
so this blog here can only scratch the surface of the many things about modern society that anger, annoy, trouble me. i spent a few hours rattling this off. i hope you guys appreciate it. i don't know what my goal is. maybe i just needed to vent.
*context* I am a 24 yr old californian student studying civil engineering a few months from graduation. I am also a diamond level random player. Take my credentials as you will lol.
"Between 1983 and 2007, the top 5 percent saw their debt fall from 80 cents for every dollar of income to 65 cents, while the bottom 95 percent saw their debt rise from 60 cents for every dollar of income to $1.40"
The rich take on debt to invest and make returns. The non rich take on debt to keep up with the typical American standard of living (house, 2 cars, cable TV, cell phones, overpriced inferior healthcare).
What does this mean?
The rich are borrowing less while gaining more income than ever, and are taxed less than ever on said income http://i.imgur.com/QuuLxz4.png . The masses, on the other hand, borrow to consume, and do not see a benefit for their much higher debt to asset or debt to income ratio.
Why are the rich more successful than ever?
The oligarchs of the US have increased their profitability by taking advantage of the American people and Federal and State governments. Americans are some of the most productive people in the world. We take less vacations and work more hours than most other peoples in the world. Despite this, worker compensation has not kept up with worker productivity. http://i.imgur.com/xlHii3t.png
In addition, corporate America and the oligarchs that control and benefit from it have lobbied, bought, and mobbed in order to ensure that they do not pay their fair share back to the American people that sustains them. In essence, they bite the hand that feeds them. As the Wall Street Journal reported 2/3/2012, "The effective corporate tax rate in 2011 fell to 12.1%, its lowest level since before World War I." Why do the 500 top companies in Fortune 500 pay an average tax rate of 18.5. Why do 30 of these top companies actually pay have a NEGATIVE tax rate (wikipedia.org/wiki/tax_avoidance)? One of these is Chevron, which shattered profit records consecutively in 2007 and 2008 by posting profits of $18.7B and $24,000,000,000.00 respectively (chevron.com/annualreport/2008).
You might think, "How do they get away with this? Why doesn't the government stop them?" The answer is that our lawmakers benefit from this. They don't want to stop it. Corporate donations, lobbyists, and SuperPACS post Citizens' United guarantee that big money is everything in politics. Congressional votes are bought and sold thanks to the lack of accountability our politicians are held to. Politicians allow the government to be robbed and are rewarded handsomely for it. It's not their money, why should they care?
You might think, "If congressmen continue to vote for policy which hurts their constituents, surely the people will vote them out the next election!" There are two reasons why this is generally not a concern. The first is that thanks to painfully obvious gerrymandering in many districts, most representatives do not fear a serious challenge from their opposing political party. Secondly, thanks to the "revolving door," congressmen have cushy jobs and rewards waiting for them as reward for their loyal service while in office. Legislators often join the very industries they once "regulated" while in office as high paid advisors and policy makers. Eventually they may even run for office again, citing their many successful years in the private sector as evidence of their competence. This image shows who's best interests congress really has at heart. http://i.imgur.com/s76WrcD.png (Larry Bartels "Economic Inequality and Political Representation")
Make no mistake, policy makers are in it for themselves. How else could they allow the sequester to occur, wiping out millions of dollars of funding for programs that Americans depend on, such as the Head Start program, meat inspection funding, research grant funding, etc. Finally, right before their latest recess, Congress stepped in to alleviate some of the pain of the sequester. How you ask? By restoring funding to the Federal Aviation Administration, which will diminish some of the delays and hassle experienced at airports since the sequestration (abcnews.go.com). Why was this funding restored ahead of the countless other programs? Simple, because politicians depend on flights for their constant travel, vacationing, and campaigning. Oh, and what about congressional salary cuts? That was never on the table for sequestration.
As you might have noticed by now, I can probably write about this for hours. Maybe I'm wrong about many of these facts. Maybe you think I am full of it. You don't have to believe me. All I ask is: please do not be deceived. Don't let them tell you that the terrorists and foreign citizens hate us because they are "jealous of our freedom." Don't let them tell you that our rights have to be restricted to "keep us safe." The irony of some of these statements is nauseating. The US is in sinking in decline, and I don't know who can plug the leak. Patriot act, indefinite detention, ag gag bills (google it) warrantless wire/mail/email tapping, killer spy drones patrolling the sky - our rights are under attack. You would be outraged if someone mugged you, but corporations and lawmakers rip your rights and future right out from under you, and you're content to browse facebook.
|
Well, you are mixing two issues. The problem of corruption, insufficient public control of representatives and corporate influence on goverment is worldwide, serious and no real large-scale solution is in sight - you probably think that it is somehow worse in the U.S:, but that's just the "grass is always greener" syndrome. In fact, people from Europe complain about the same things to no end.
But what I don't like is that you start with a catchy yet absolutely unrelated statistics. The fact that people are falling in debts to finance their extraneous consumptions isn't a sign of some great injustice, but of them being idiots.
|
i think it's a pretty narrow way to look at it. blaming ppl for buying into the american dream and taking in debt to buy a house and buy cars - to me it's like being against abortion because it wouldn't be necessary if the woman hadn't been careless etc etc. whether or not it's true, one must be pragmatic about it. thanks for the response btw.
the truth is, the grass is actually greener in several places.. this fact is backed up by many different methods of analysis.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/80/The_Great_Gatsby_Curve.png
free higher education for everybody in Sweden. seems pretty swell doesn't it?
|
|
|
Yeah you're definitely full of it. First you went on a huge incoherent rant from growing income equality, to corporate tax rates, to congressional legislation and budget, to terrorists, rights, and legal issues. It's hard to take your writing seriously when your ideas are all over the place, cherry picked, and throwing data all over the place. Let me show you some points in one paragraph:
In addition, corporate America and the oligarchs that control and benefit from it have lobbied, bought, and mobbed in order to ensure that they do not pay their fair share back to the American people that sustains them. In essence, they bite the hand that feeds them. As the Wall Street Journal reported 2/3/2012, "The effective corporate tax rate in 2011 fell to 12.1%, its lowest level since before World War I." Why do the 500 top companies in Fortune 500 pay an average tax rate of 18.5. Why do 30 of these top companies actually pay have a NEGATIVE tax rate (wikipedia.org/wiki/tax_avoidance)? One of these is Chevron, which shattered profit records consecutively in 2007 and 2008 by posting profits of $18.7B and $24,000,000,000.00 respectively (chevron.com/annualreport/2008).
Effective tax rate at 12.1% has absolutely no value without context or comparison. Citing World War I is meaningless considering that the economy, politics, and society of today is vastly different from the 1910s. Do you even know what the difference is between effective tax rate and average tax rate btw? Why even bother to post Chevon's profits out of the 30? Why did you write one profit in short form ($18.7B) and the other in long form? ($24,000,000,000.00)? This implies that you're just throwing data without doing the analysis.
Sorry, I don't know how you can be so mad and annoyed when you don't seem to understand the issue as a whole, or at least fail to communicate it. First you put out the question why the rich are getting richer and at the end you conclude with "You would be outraged if someone mugged you, but corporations and lawmakers rip your rights and future right out from under you, and you're content to browse facebook". Should we have to point out that you're content with browsing Teamliquid.net as well?
|
Let us not get extreme here. Every country has a different tax rate because they need to balance two ideals:
equality and fairness
I think we all believe that the basic idea of capitalism is fair; you get paid based on how valuable you are.
the problem is that fairness does not equate equality. The rich getting richer and the poor getting poor should be obvious
because of genetics and environment. Granted it doesn't always work that way but you can't deny that a correlation exists.
Countries like the US values fairness more and countries like Sweden values equality more, hence different social/tax structures.
What I am trying to say is this: don't make it a question of right or wrong. it's a matter of where on the scale that particular society prefers, not a question of morality.
|
|
|
On May 02 2013 15:38 Rucho wrote:The oligarchs of the US have increased their profitability by taking advantage of the American people and Federal and State governments. Americans are some of the most productive people in the world. We take less vacations and work more hours than most other peoples in the world. Despite this, worker compensation has not kept up with worker productivity. http://i.imgur.com/xlHii3t.png In addition, corporate America and the oligarchs that control and benefit from it have lobbied, bought, and mobbed in order to ensure that they do not pay their fair share back to the American people that sustains them. In essence, they bite the hand that feeds them. As the Wall Street Journal reported 2/3/2012, "The effective corporate tax rate in 2011 fell to 12.1%, its lowest level since before World War I." Why do the 500 top companies in Fortune 500 pay an average tax rate of 18.5. Why do 30 of these top companies actually pay have a NEGATIVE tax rate (wikipedia.org/wiki/tax_avoidance)? One of these is Chevron, which shattered profit records consecutively in 2007 and 2008 by posting profits of $18.7B and $24,000,000,000.00 respectively (chevron.com/annualreport/2008). You might think, "How do they get away with this? Why doesn't the government stop them?" The answer is that our lawmakers benefit from this. They don't want to stop it. Corporate donations, lobbyists, and SuperPACS post Citizens' United guarantee that big money is everything in politics. Congressional votes are bought and sold thanks to the lack of accountability our politicians are held to. Politicians allow the government to be robbed and are rewarded handsomely for it. It's not their money, why should they care? You might think, "If congressmen continue to vote for policy which hurts their constituents, surely the people will vote them out the next election!" There are two reasons why this is generally not a concern. The first is that thanks to painfully obvious gerrymandering in many districts, most representatives do not fear a serious challenge from their opposing political party. Secondly, thanks to the "revolving door," congressmen have cushy jobs and rewards waiting for them as reward for their loyal service while in office. Legislators often join the very industries they once "regulated" while in office as high paid advisors and policy makers. Eventually they may even run for office again, citing their many successful years in the private sector as evidence of their competence. This image shows who's best interests congress really has at heart. http://i.imgur.com/s76WrcD.png (Larry Bartels "Economic Inequality and Political Representation") Make no mistake, policy makers are in it for themselves. How else could they allow the sequester to occur, wiping out millions of dollars of funding for programs that Americans depend on, such as the Head Start program, meat inspection funding, research grant funding, etc. Finally, right before their latest recess, Congress stepped in to alleviate some of the pain of the sequester. How you ask? By restoring funding to the Federal Aviation Administration, which will diminish some of the delays and hassle experienced at airports since the sequestration (abcnews.go.com). Why was this funding restored ahead of the countless other programs? Simple, because politicians depend on flights for their constant travel, vacationing, and campaigning. Oh, and what about congressional salary cuts? That was never on the table for sequestration.
Your knowledge on the subject is very good and you are accurate. I can see how you understand the conflicts of interest:
Legislators often join the very industries they once "regulated" while in office as high paid advisors and policy makers.
Unfortunately for you, the majority of citizens of America are too blind to see this. I doubt things will get better and it will get much worse - but maybe when America crashes, someday the people will rise again.
Ask anyone is the streets what kind of government they think America is - I bet you 90% will say Democracy. But they are all wrong. Even I, as a foreigner, will tell you that America is a Republic. Your Founding Fathers saw the evils of democracy - that is the tyranny of the majority and took great pains to put in checks and balances to avoid the situation that America is right now.
In the 50s, ask any kid in school and they will correctly tell you it's a Republic. It's because the majority of the citizens in America have been brainwashed, and the fall of the empire is inevitable.
|
Don't wanna start any drama but it's weird to see inequality in the u.s seeing as the ones driving the country are largely socialists and socialism relates to communism wich is all about equal opportunities and equal payment.
|
On May 02 2013 15:38 Rucho wrote:
Americans are some of the most productive people in the world. We take less vacations and work more hours than most other peoples in the world.
Instantly lost interest after reading that ridiculous statement.
|
On May 03 2013 01:22 Jan1997 wrote:
Don't wanna start any drama but it's weird to see inequality in the u.s seeing as the ones driving the country are largely socialists and socialism relates to communism wich is all about equal opportunities and equal payment.
Socialists and socialism driving the country are smoke and mirrors. What's happening is: The rich elite ruling class (a.k.a. the top 5-10% of the population) applies policies that oppresses the middle class but allows only themselves to get rich. They implement the policies by talking about a "fairness" agenda, which in reality is using big govt to implement laws that help them. Finally, they keep themselves in power by providing handouts to the lower class.
The rich elite class can afford to do this because their wealth insulates them from the cost of their policies - they live in ivory towers and don't see the effects of their policies on the average middle class. Until America wakes up and holds them accountable for their actions, nothing will change and the country will slide slowly downhill.
I'm not even talking about a Democrats vs Republican - because in reality, they now have control over both parties and the same things will happen no matter who is in power.
|
On May 02 2013 15:38 Rucho wrote:
Americans are some of the most productive people in the world. We take less vacations and work more hours than most other peoples in the world.
I find it incredibly weird that you say americans are really productive when most things america have is either bought from china or somewhere else. It was even a part of last years presidential debate about how to create more jobs and overrall be more productive.
|
On May 02 2013 18:13 dongmydrum wrote:
Let us not get extreme here. Every country has a different tax rate because they need to balance two ideals:
equality and fairness
I think we all believe that the basic idea of capitalism is fair; you get paid based on how valuable you are.
the problem is that fairness does not equate equality. The rich getting richer and the poor getting poor should be obvious
because of genetics and environment. Granted it doesn't always work that way but you can't deny that a correlation exists.
Countries like the US values fairness more and countries like Sweden values equality more, hence different social/tax structures.
What I am trying to say is this: don't make it a question of right or wrong. it's a matter of where on the scale that particular society prefers, not a question of morality.
The basic idea of capitalism may be fair, but that's like saying the basic idea of communism is equal. It doesn't really pan out the way you would hope it would. Even if capitalism were fair, I would still consider the treatment of those at the bottom of the economic system a moral issue.
|
You've outlined a lot of things that are very wrong with the setup of our country. You've gone most of the way there. But the real underlying question that still remains is - why is this happening? And how do we alter it?
My personal theory is that this is happening because of something inherent to capitalism - which is that money is effectively exchangeable for anything of value - and therefore money for money's sake in employment is the most efficient path to anything, because other forms of value in employment (such as the rewarding feeling of doing the right thing/helping others, the passion attained by doing something you love, the attachment you get from working with people you like, etc. - or in this case the inherent value of having governed well) cannot be exchanged for items of value like food, clothing, luxuries and rent.
We may decry these people for being "greedy", but this notion is really beside the point, which is that capitalism is based upon greed - or enlightened self-interest, as it is otherwise called, the collective of which forms the "invisible hand" of capitalism. And further, under the tenants of capitalism, how is one supposed to act, if not in a greedy fashion? Intentionally inefficiently? And if so, how inefficient must one operate to escape the label of "greedy"? How much value must one place on other things ahead of money before they are appropriately not greedy? How do we define such a boundary? Corporations will necessarily push the envelope here - so if we cannot define how they ought to act, how can we regulate them in a manner which is both clear and fair?
Honestly, I've already written too much on the matter, but my point is that if you're going to criticize, you may as well offer alternatives - and once you start thinking in terms of alternatives, you kind of notice that capitalism doesn't really leave you in a good spot unless we change the role of capital within society.
|
On May 03 2013 01:31 Jan1997 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 02 2013 15:38 Rucho wrote:
Americans are some of the most productive people in the world. We take less vacations and work more hours than most other peoples in the world.
I find it incredibly weird that you say americans are really productive when most things america have is either bought from china or somewhere else. It was even a part of last years presidential debate about how to create more jobs and overrall be more productive.
Productive does not necessarily mean the production of material objects. Productive in this context is simply referencing "producing positive results." A large part of the American economy is either producing high-tech goods or in the service sector (working in medicine, finance, law, etc.). Production here is referring to the labor power that Americans produce when taking "less vacations" and working "more hours."
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
