Kids these days, throwing around averages and big numbers...whooaaaa get the pitchforks ready!

I LOVE THE CASH KITTY !!!!!!

The VIPs, CEOs, managers and other assorted higher-ups are making more than ever. It's everyone else on Wall Street (the analysts, the assistants, the admins, the IT people, etc etc) who's getting screwed by having their pay cut or not getting a raise for years.

You know, kind of like 99% of all corporations nowadays. The rich get richer and the middle class people lose their jobs.

The ironic part is the people with the most money don't want to pay their taxes.

As the saying goes the rich get richer the poor get poorer.

More like the middle class gets wiped out. Did our grandparents' generation have SCHIP, numerous education grants, Medicaid and Medicare? The poor aren't so poor in this nation. (Waits for the comments attacking me saying Why dont you try being poor then?)

There are plenty of programs in place to provide jobs, healthcare and housing for the poor.

It's the middle class that gets the short end of the stick and moves to the poor end of the spectrum.

This is part of a larger problem, remember the Top 1% of Americans own 42.7% of America's financial wealth, the next 19% own 50.3% and the bottom 80% of Americans only own 7% of America's financial wealth (economist Edward N. Wolff at New York University (2010)). This is staggering! The Top 20% owns 93% and the remaining 7% is being shared by 80% of America! Yet we sit here arguing about welfare recipients, immigration, etc as if this is these are the problems. The real problem is that the rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer at unprecedented rates. The problem is the the country's ultra rich are looting this country. The economic divide is getting greater and greater because the ultra rich are squeezing every dollar out of the rest of us. The American Dream is dead, they killed it when they destroyed the middle class. But people constantly look down at the poorer guy and want to kick him/her and blame them for their misfortunes when they should be looking at up at the Top 1%.

Money and wealth are not infinite for the rich to get richer, the poor must get poorer and to a certain extent that is an acceptable byproduct of capitalism, but where do we draw the line? What happens when the bottom 80% can no longer afford to go to college and aspire towards a better life? It seems its happening now. Go to any hospital in this city and the majority of new doctors are foreigners. Look at the technology sector and you'll see a majority of the programmers and technicians are also foreigners. Yet most American can barely afford to go to college anymore. What happened to the American Dream? How many Americans' pursuit of the American Dream was shattered and their lives destroyed by the Top 1% during this banking crisis? First, the Top 1% made a profit by selling them houses they couldn't afford at inflated prices. Then made a profit remortgaging the properties over and over. Then the Top 1% cried broke and we "saved" them with taxpayer bailouts and now they're making a profit by repossessing these peoples' homes and taking whatever equity they had in them. Then they resell them again and the cycle continues That's how the rich get richer and the poor get poorer, over and over again. There can't ever be peace because they need to create wars and instability so they can keep profiteering from it. The make money from oil and then make money from cleaning up their oil spill. This oil spill will undoubtedly be a big money maker for them, I'm sure Haliburton and the rest of them are already on the scene. And regardless of all the fines and money BP will have to pay, we the taxpayers will end up paying for a substantial share of the bill. Congress will soon allocate billions towards the cleanup effort and they'll overcharge us to cleanup their mess. The Top 1% is looting America! Taking every dollar they can get out of our hands and just storing it, so much for trickle down economics, huh?

You say "it's the middle class that gets the short end of the stick and moves to the poor end of the spectrum" and you're absolutely right but who's causing that? It's not the poor, all their assistance put together is nothing compared to the profits that the Top 1% made from these wars. We've spent a $1 trillion on Iraq and Afganistan and who profited from that?

The American Dream is dead, it died with the middle class. The middle class is what made America great, now we just have the ultra-rich and the working poor and it's getting worst and worst every day. How long will it continue? Until we're all economic slaves? I guess in many respects we already are. This is the first generation where our kids are not going to do better than their parents. Most adult children can't even afford to move out of their parents house now or are being forced to move back home. What's in store for the next generation? But the rich are still getting richer by the day!

This is directly from wikipedia:

"Michael Rubens Bloomberg (born February 14, 1942) is the current Mayor of New York City, and the 8th richest person in the United States with personal wealth of US$18 billion in 2010." ... "In March 2009, Forbes reported Michael Bloomberg's wealth at $16 billion, a gain of $4.5 billion since the previous year"

While most New Yorkers were figuring out how to survive during these hard economic times his wealth grew by $4.5 BILLION in one year! Couldn't his wealth just grow by say $2 billion and the other $2.5 billion dollars go to raises for the thousands of workers his various companies employs? Then again this is the man who was opposed to workers making $10/hr at government subsidized projects! I don't know how he can call himself a philanthropist, but that's a whole other discussion. This just one example of the rich getting richer while we, the bottom 80% of the country, suffer.

I'm tired of that old cliche "if we tax the wealthy and their corporations they'll leave". I say let them leave then, if they're making billions and can't afford to pay a little more in taxes then let them! Get out! Because this social injustice has gone on long enough! They barely pay any taxes then are the first ones lobbying for millions in taxpayer subsidies or for government's business. So they don't want to pay taxes but want taxpayers money, right?

Please read this to yourself and think about it 80% OF AMERICANS ONLY OWN 7% OF AMERICA AND IT'S GETTING WORSE BY THE DAY! How can that be fair and just? And how long will we, as Americans, accept this? What if, or better yet when, this Top 20% accumulates 95% of this country's wealth what will the typical American's standard of living be? When 270 Million Americans are fighting each other for the remaining 5% of America's wealth, what will life be like in our country? After all this is OUR COUNTRY, right?

I think a lot of what you said is true, but a lot of it is totally false. Everyone in this country (not just the top 1%) THOUGHT they were rich. Our government promoted the concept of "everyone is ENTITLED to own a home" through the Community Reinvestment Act, and they forced banks (I guess they're the 1%?) to lend to previously uncreditworthy borrowers to promote this concept. Then, the "poor" borrowed money wildly beyond their means, and the "rich" didn't want anything to do with this debt cause they knew it was bullsh*t, so they sold it.

Bloombergs wealth is tied to the PERCEIVED value of Bloomberg (the company), which he has absolutely no control over as Mayor. It's not like somebody delivered him 4.5 billion in a package this year and he's hording it all. Just stop with this.

And, you're "tired" of the cliche that if you tax corporations and their companies that they'll leave, huh? Well, sorry to break it to you, but it's been happening for about 50 years, and the LAST thing we need right now is for it to continue. Remember the Fish Market at South Street Seaport? Remember the Garment district? Remember the steel industry in Pittsburgh? Ever been to Detroit? Utica? All of these cities are victims of OUR GOVERNMENT imposing taxes, social programs, and other regulations that made it just straight up unprofitable to continue on US soil, and the MIDDLE CLASS suffered from this. Patterson wants to tax soda huh? Then Pepsico will straight up leave New York, and we will lose their tax revenue....good idea. "Let em leave!" huh?....spoken like a true asshole. This is how the United States makes money. The only thing we really have left is the Financial Industry, and we need to embrace it until we can change.

And we DO need to change. We need to cut taxes for people across the board, and let individuals spend money, NOT the government spend it for them. We can't bail ANY of these companies out. If you made mistakes, sorry, you fail. We need to promote savings among Americans, not speculative borrowing, and we need to INCREASE THE PRODUCITVE CAPACITY OF THE UNITED STATES. WE NEED TO BRING INDUSTRY BACK ONTO OUR SOIL, CUT THE UNIONIZED BENEFITS THAT DRAG INDUSTRY DOWN FOR DECADES, AND PUT THE AMERICAN MIDDLE CLASS BACK TO WORK.

"Let em leave"!?!?! THEN what?

As far as my they can "Get Out!" remark, that was because I refuse to fall for the intimidation of these corporations and the hysteria caused by it. Let's look at one of the examples you mentioned Detroit and the devastation caused by the automobile companies pull out of their economy. Recently I saw documentary on the effects of the car industry's pull out of Detroit and the interviewer asked one of the car companies' spokesperson what responsibility he felt towards Detroit's economic problems and he looked right at the camera and said, "Our responsibility is solely to make a profit for our shareholders". Did he forget that most of the workers were in fact shareholders as well? No, but what he neglected to say was that their responsibility was to the Top 1% that own millions of shares, not the peons with a few shares or even a few hundred. How ironic that a few years later they would come begging for billions of taxpayer bailouts from Congress. My question is what happened? Didn't they leave Detroit to avoid the taxes and become more profitable? They turned their back on Detroit and America chasing profits but then had to come begging us for money. We shouldn't have given them one red cent, if only for their disloyalty. So that argument about "if we tax them they'll leave so we have to give in to their every demand" doesn't fly with me because there's many other factors they have to consider besides taxes whether to stay or move to another country. I'm not opposed to some tax incentives or breaks but they have to be within reason and have to benefit everyone equally, "growth" for both corporations and taxpayers. If we're going to subsidize their business then we need to see some returns as well. I remember a few years ago when the Yankees tried the same argument saying that if we didn't finance a new stadium and give them tax breaks they were going to leave NY. What a ridiculous threat, do you honestly think that the NJ Yankees would make the same money? Of course not but they used that veiled threat to cause fear and panic and I refuse to fall for it. As far as the soda tax law, I find it misguided and ridiculous too, but that's targeting the consumers who buy the product, not the corporations. I think the problem deals more with NAFTA and other free trade agreements (and some of the unreasonable demands of the unions) that made it more profitable to do business in these other countries, not so much the taxes which are a small percentage of their profits. Also the crux of my argument was the taxation of the Top 1%, not so much the corporations themselves (although they need to pay their share too) but the super ultra rich that are paying less and less on taxes due to all the loop holes. Whenever I see a CEO making 10 million dollars a year plus multi-million dollar bonuses shortly after a bailout, while laying off workers I think that's a problem and its destroying America. The financial divide in this country is reaching epic proportions and its becoming a civil rights issue affecting all Americans.

Read these articles about how the predatory lenders are now targeting college students. So is another generation going to be robbed of the American Dream? Were does it end? And how's profitting from the American demise?

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/subprime_goes_to_college_FeiheNJfGYtoSwmtl5etJP

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/06/08/banks-paying-colleges-for_n_604109.html

Okay...this one is loaded. First of all, if you willfully buy shares of the company you work for, you're an idiot. You're just double leveraging yourself on the performance of your company. Then if you're fired you'll probably lose your income AND it's likely the shares of your company will go down. So...stupid move 1. Don't buy shares in the company you work for...hedge your bets.

Stupid argument 2. Making decisions for the benefit of the shareholder and trying to maximize profit for the shareholder is EXACTLY THE POINT OF EVERY SINGLE PUBLIC COMPANY IN EXISTENCE, and relying on investors to give you liquidity is exactly why companies go public. And, what is the difference between owning a million shares or 1? The share prices still fluctuate the exact same, you just have a larger cost basis and you're impacted more or less. I don't follow your logic there.

And, I 100% agree with you. We shouldn't have bailed out a single entity at any point in this crisis. So...why did Obama and Bush do it? I don't know, and I completely agree with your disgust. Let em fail, and they will be replaced with profitable businesses, rather than spending billions in taxpayer funds to prop up failed businesses.

And, I didn't say we "have to give into their every demand" (hah!) My point was that we need to make it attractive for businesses to operate on US soil. That means we can't go out of our way to over-tax, over-regulate, and make it completely inefficient to stay here. THAT WAY, these corporations can actually afford to employ the middle class (which barely exists). And I completely agree with you that there is a growing divide among economic classes in this country, only, i'm actually trying to propose a way to fix it, and you've yet to explain why businesses should "Get Out." Are you going to? How could you possibly advocate business leaving America?

And, don't forget that the Top 1% you refer to are the investors and employers in this country. If you want to fuck them, you are trickle-down fucking us all.

"1. Don't buy shares in the company you work for...hedge your bets."

I don't know sir but many initial employees of Microsoft, Google, etc. would beg to differ but I understand your philosophy. I wish you could've invested the money of all those Detroit auto workers, I really do. Somebody needed to explain that theory to them.

"2. Making decisions for the benefit of the shareholder and trying to maximize profit for the shareholder is EXACTLY THE POINT OF EVERY SINGLE PUBLIC COMPANY IN EXISTENCE"

Absolutely! I learned that many years ago in Business 101 what I didn't learn in Poly Sci was that our government was going to only be beholden to the corporations and their lobbyists and sell out the American people. I am not in any way against capitalism. I still think it's the greatest, most innovative economic system in the world but it has gotten out of control and turned into greed in this country. This blind pursuit of money with no morals or conscience is ruining America. We need our elected officials to be the gatekeepers of morality and consciousness, but how can they when the Top 1%'s lobbyists are always offering them deals and incentives to sway their vote to benefit them. Corporations are looking out for themselves, politicians are looking out for them so who's looking out for us? America we need to wake up.

"trickle-down fucking us all"

Oh the myth. the mystery, the legend of Trickle Down Economics, what a concept if you give to the rich it will trickle down to the poor. It's a lie, doesn't work for anyone but the rich. Why don't we try Trickle Up Economics? Let the poor keep more money and they will spend more which will still benefit the rich and their corporations but at least allow the poor to breathe a little?

And don't forget, the Top 1% were never as rich and powerful as they are now, ever. 3 million owning almost half of America? Never in the history of this country. As far as then being the employers and investors, small businesses always employed more Americans than the large corporations but investments yeah I guess so with 80% only owing 7% we don't have much to invest, we're trying to survive.

I agree with everything you said. But, how do we let the poor keep a little more money? Tax cuts. See solution number 4 above.

But, I suppose it's an opinion (not really..),but trickle down economics absolutely works. Everyone is entitle to their own opinion. But, fundamentally speaking, those at the top pay those at the bottom. Those at the bottom tend to spend more on themselves, and not other people at the bottom.

But, agree to disagree...

Hey jles, it's been awhile. I must say I learned a lot and enjoyed our lively debate.

Here's a an article that I think puts my stance in a much more eloquent and cohesive way.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/kevin-zeese/to-fix-americas-fiscal-cr_b_634135.html

Hopefully you can look it over and tell me what you think.

Even if we disagree I value your opinion.

Johnnnnnnn....come on man! You're better than this stuff! The Huffington Post?!? I had a hard time believing that the "executive Director of votersforpeace.org" (vs. voters against?) is going to have a subjective opinion, but I read most of it.

And, I mean, there are just "facts" presented here that are unsubstantiated or sourced, and if given just a little consideration, are deemed completely untrue.

What I absolutely do agree with: We must stop these wars, and we must stop bailing out banks or other failed institutions (is that what he meant by corporate welfare?). But the rest of these arguments are just so comically biased that it's almost pointless to break them down subjectively.

Here, let's make this simple. You, from what I've gathered, believe in Keynesian economic theory. You believe, like Paul Krugman, and basically every other president of the last 20 years except Clinton that the way you fix financials ails is to have the government tax, and spend the taxpayer money to "stimulate the economy" because "if the government doesn't do it, nobody will". Austrian economists, like Peter Schiff (my BOY! the ORACLE! Find any youtube video with him and tell me he's wrong about stuff), Henry Hazlitt, and Ron Paul (kinda unfortunately), all believe that government is the cause of many of our problems, because they lack incentive to maximize efficient methods of business that will DRIVE COSTS DOWN over the long-run. And you have a few rich bearaucrats in power taxing people, taking their money, and then deciding for them the best way for it to be spent. So, their overall argument is that the government not only doesn't have incentive to make things more efficient, they actually NEED prices of everything to go up overtime to increase their tax revenue, and debase the currency upon which they owe their loans. The easiest way to do this? The printing press.

So, I absolutely believe in Healtchare, and Medicaid, and Social Security....but I also believe that the only way you're really going to help people without bankrupting our country is by LOWERING THE COST OF HEALTHCARE COVERAGE (and education while we're at it), and this cannot be done if it is government run, because the US Government is the most inefficient, most broke entity on the planet. They're not even broke, they're 12 trillion in the hole!

Anyway, that's all I can really say. We have fundamentally differing views, which is what makes this country great. Am I right? Maybe not. But I know both arguments, and I think I am. That's the best I can do. I hope you'll take a moment from bashing the easy targets like the rich, banks, etc. and step back to consider all potential culprits in this scenario....because there are lots.

You should also read "How Economy's Grow and Why they Crash" by Peter Schiff. Really really easy read that breaks down simple economics, and may show you why I have a disdain for government solutions since the Federal Reserve was born in 1913

Always love chatting. Take care.

But throughout every stage leading up to and after the financial crisis America's elite ultra rich found a way to make money at the expense of the rest of us.

As far as Bloomberg, I used him as an example of "growth" that benefits very few but the elite ultra rich. For his personal "growth" to be $4.5 billion in a year where most of America was experiencing one of the worst recession/depression in American history says something about our country's distribution of wealth and "growth".

Plenty of people lost money in this country, including the ultra rich. But, maybe they were able to become ultra rich because they're smart? The people that shorted sub-prime mortgages (which may qualify as 'at the expense of the poor'?) absolutely deserve to be paid out in droves. That's what keeps markets in check.

Or maybe the were able to take advantage of the less fortunate while our government stood by and watched or better yet aided them? Maybe it doesn't take much intelligence or business acumen to rob from the poor, just give them enough rope and they'll hang themselves right?

Hah. Yeah, i mean, again, I can't really disagree with you there. But, I just want to make sure you recognize the government role in this crisis IN ADDITION to the role of the "1%". Because if we impose more regulation, then we're just asking for MORE government, and they fucked it up the first time around anyway! Why do we want more government?

Here I'll let factcheck.org break it down for you:

The Real Deal

So who is to blame? There's plenty of blame to go around, and it doesn't fasten only on one party or even mainly on what Washington did or didn't do. As The Economist magazine noted recently, the problem is one of "layered irresponsibility ... with hard-working homeowners and billionaire villains each playing a role." Here's a partial list of those alleged to be at fault:

The Federal Reserve, which slashed interest rates after the dot-com bubble burst, making credit cheap.

Home buyers, who took advantage of easy credit to bid up the prices of homes excessively.

Congress, which continues to support a mortgage tax deduction that gives consumers a tax incentive to buy more expensive houses.

Real estate agents, most of whom work for the sellers rather than the buyers and who earned higher commissions from selling more expensive homes.

The Clinton administration, which pushed for less stringent credit and downpayment requirements for working- and middle-class families.

Mortgage brokers, who offered less-credit-worthy home buyers subprime, adjustable rate loans with low initial payments, but exploding interest rates.

Former Federal Reserve chairman Alan Greenspan, who in 2004, near the peak of the housing bubble, encouraged Americans to take out adjustable rate mortgages.

Wall Street firms, who paid too little attention to the quality of the risky loans that they bundled into Mortgage Backed Securities (MBS), and issued bonds using those securities as collateral.

The Bush administration, which failed to provide needed government oversight of the increasingly dicey mortgage-backed securities market.

An obscure accounting rule called mark-to-market, which can have the paradoxical result of making assets be worth less on paper than they are in reality during times of panic.

Collective delusion, or a belief on the part of all parties that home prices would keep rising forever, no matter how high or how fast they had already gone up.

The U.S. economy is enormously complicated. Screwing it up takes a great deal of cooperation. Claiming that a single piece of legislation was responsible for (or could have averted) the crisis is just political grandstanding. We have no advice to offer on how best to solve the financial crisis. But these sorts of partisan caricatures can only make the task more difficult.

http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/who_caused_the_economic_crisis.html

Wait...this is exactly right, and kind of totally refutes your whole argument.

" with hard-working homeowners and billionaire villains each playing a role"

So who's side are you on? The prey or the predator? The hardworking Americans who lost their homes, equity, and the their pursuit of the American Dream or the "billionaire villains" who added to their coffers at their expense?