It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: Wayfarer
originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: Wayfarer
Im not sure why you'd worry about civility, etc. You don't seem to be rude.
Part of my job is interpreting data. The one thing i have learned is that data may point to something that isn't really there. An example from the first few pages (page 1, actually):
Could relate to the increase in efficiency seen in systems as a natural progression into the industrial age and post war era. It could be that when computers began to be used to gain efficiency in the mid 70's, you see the divergence of productivity and compensation. Honestly, you can't pay me for doing the job of 4 people when i've created efficiencies that allow me to do said work in 50 hours a week.
The only other graph i found is this:
Which creates quite a few questions for me to answer before I can give you any kind of intelligent reply. But I would point out that it isn't the poor we should be measuring, its the middle class. With a strong middle class, the poor feel much less pain.
An example of a question I have is: all the cash holdings from among the top 10% in the US....how many of those are foreign nationals/expats who are offshoring our currency?
First, does it really matter what the driver is for wealth inequality (automation, wealth hoarding, etc.) when the effect is what should be tackled? I understand that nobody is going to have their mind changed regarding trickle down economics (as most of its supporters/detractors can point to as many datasets that potentially support their cause as they can find, but which are ultimately inconclusive on account of the plethora of factors that are yet to be correlated). Rather, when its clear that money is becoming focused into the top 1% (and shown that only a small portion of that reinvested) how does that re-invigorate the economy better than putting that money into lower/middle class hands that instantly return it into the economic system? My earlier post regarding my inability to conceptualize making the wealthy even wealthier hinges on the fact wouldn't it make sense that as the wealthy got wealthier so to would the lower/middle class (which in fact this isn't whats happening). I just can't imagine that there is some magical 'break-point' we are just short of that when reached will suddenly propagate spending surges by the ultra-wealthy.
Secondly, why would the wealthy return their money to the US unless it won't be taxed (or taxed at a lower rate than where it is currently being held)? They exist to perpetuate their wealth, and the only reason it gets brought back into the US is because we're allowing them to return it tax free (which doesn't feed back into the system). Is the middle class made stronger by the rich having larger bank accounts (that aren't being spent, but rather accrued in ever increasing fashion)?
originally posted by: Southern Guardian
Anybody feeling those benefits trickling down? If not don't bother waiting as it's not looking promising:
Donald Trump’s presidency has been marked by turmoil, and his approval ratings are low. But US CEOs seemed eager to show their support for his first major piece of legislation, the “Tax Cuts and Jobs Act” that cleared Congress on Wednesday (Dec. 20). A clutch of big US banks and telecoms pledged to hand out millions in bonuses off the back of tax reform.
That's lovely. A pledge to pass down the benefits of these tax cuts to the little man. We need this.
originally posted by: underpass61
a reply to: Uberdoubter
I'd say 99 percent of the people I know (myself included) are these nonexistent in-betweens you mention. Get a job and join us (unless you're already an overpaid douche).