Comments about ‘Skyrocketing income inequality in America over the past 30 years’

Return to article »

Published: Wednesday, Nov. 21 2012 6:30 a.m. MST

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
worf
Mcallen, TX

Who'se fault is that?;

* we all had free schooling
* Head Start program was there to help the poor
* many benefits created to help people become successful
* war on poverty was declared, with trillions of dollars being spent.
* and now Obama care is going to help? I pay for my insurance, and now will pay more. Not fair.

And the inequality gap Skyrockets?---Why?

What did we get for a sixteen trillion dollar debt?

Schwa
South Jordan, UT

What did we get for a sixteen trillion dollar debt? We got 2 extended middle east wars, Medicare Part D, and forgiveness of all Wall St. mistakes so that bankers didn't have to go to jail.

What we should have purchased instead was single payer health care, heavily subsidized higher education, and a new power grid.

Lane Myer
Salt Lake City, UT

They were suppose to invest those tax cuts into new jobs for other Americans! You mean they kept it and also raised their wages at a much higher rate than they did for their employees? Color me surprised!

Greed is NOT a good word.

Stalwart Sentinel
San Jose, CA

DesNews, let me introduce you to Ronald Reagan's policies... oh, I see you've only just met.

Pete1215
Lafayette, IN

Those with a good education (and the intellingence gained via genetics) were in a position to gain from the existence of Chinese peasant factory workers. Those with a poor education (and less intelligence) got to compete with Chinese peasant factory workers.

killpack
Sandy, UT

Have no fear, egalitarians. Income inequality will soon disappear in this country. Since the wealthy are repeatedly vilified by politicians and media talking heads and since they are threatened more and more with higher taxes and more regulation, they will likely close up shop here and take their business and wealth abroad. Actually, they have already been doing this in droves and will only continue to do this if anti-business rhetoric continues. Latin America and Asia would kill for all of this 'inequality.' Why do you think they have so many business friendly incentives? Low or no taxes. Low regulations. Why would any business in this country not want to relocate abroad? But, hey, at least when that happens, we will have achieved that equality that everyone wants. At least every one will be paying there fair share. Forget the fact that we scared away all of the good businesses. Ah, what do I care, I'll probably move to Taiwan or Hong Kong anyway. Good luck to the rest of you. Enjoy your equality.

RedShirt
USS Enterprise, UT

The funny thing is that the liberals are trying to reduce income inequality through laws and regulation, and it is all of the laws and regulations that are making the problem worse.

You can't legislate away poverty, that only happens when people and employers can concentrate on their jobs and not the next regulation coming down from Washington.

Mountanman
Hayden, ID

There will always be income inequality and there needs to be. If one person works harder, is more innovative and takes calculated risks more than another, shouldn't he receive the benefit? America used to be a country where everyone had an equal opportunity to increase their income. That's the only incentive to improve, invent, invest and create; that they themselves will receive the reward for their efforts! Now, Democrats have arranged it so anyone who earned a dime more than someone else is punished, his dime and all his incentive to create wealth is confiscated and redistributed to someone who didn't earn it! It certainly wins elections for Democrats but how long can our economy exist? It isn't politically correct to ask this but why are most (not all) people in America poor? Could it be that they have chosen not to improve their marketable job skills, chosen not to improve themselves so they are capable of earning more income? There will always be some among us who will choose the easier path in life, and lust and envy the property of those who were rewarded for choosing a more difficult road of personal achievement!

NYJazzFan
East Elmhurst, NY

killpac and Mountanman, what?? The story spells out the issues for you but yet you still dont get it? The press is liberal? Haha, the press is CORPORATE OWNED!! Anyone who earned a dime more than another is punished? Punished how? By being given raises and tax breaks and corporate welfare?? The article states that income inequality in the US is worse than Pakistan. Pakistan is a country with super-elites on one side and millions of super poor peasants on the other.. they have better income equality than we do!! Either you guys are on the payroll or you both are blind....

worf
Mcallen, TX

In a school classroom, there sre inequality in grades.

Why take points from honor rolls students, and give it the students with lower grades?

Why should students with low grades, gain the honor of being an honor roll student?

Why would an honor roll student be lowered to a lower status? Doesn't make sense.

Mark3054
Lehi, UT

What this article describes is NOT income inequality; but rather, earning disparity. Income inequality would be differing pay for the same work. Earning disparity simply means that some occupations earn more than others. And the problem with this is......? If someone invests time, money, sweat, loss of sleep, and whatever it takes to build a successful business into an extremely profitable empire; why should they not make substantially more than the high school drop out who wants nothing more than a simple job with no stress. This is actually income equality not inequality. You get back what you put in. The whining by those who are willing to risk nothing is destroying this great country. And the politicians that listen and pander to them only need to be held accountable. There is plenty of wealth to go around; but, it needs to be earned and not just yearned.

frugalfly
PULLMAN, WA

"You cannot bring about prosperity by discouraging thrift. You cannot strengthen the weak by weakening the strong. You cannot help the wage earner by pulling down the wage payer. You cannot encourage the brotherhood of man by encouraging class hatred. You cannot help the poor by destroying the rich. You cannot keep out of trouble by spending more than you earn. You cannot build courage and character by taking away man's initiave and independence. You cannot help men permanently by doing for them that which they could and should do for themselves."- Abraham Lincoln.

What did we get for 16 trillion? Corporate Bailouts/stimulus packages that didn't work. More debt in the past 4 years than the entire preceding 230 years of the country's history. We need a flat tax. What the story doesn't say is how much GDP has increased. Though the discrepancy is higher now than 1970's, the GDP is much higher too. Tax cuts raised tax income more than any other thing in the last 50 years (economy grew!). We aren't dividing up the same pie. Though discrepancy is more the pie is much much bigger per capita.

Mountanman
Hayden, ID

NYJazzFan. Let me try again! 80% of all federal income taxes collected by to IRS comes from the wealthiest Americans while nearly 50% of Americans pay no federal income taxes at all! Therefore, in America, if you work hard, are innovative,creative and produce wealth, you are punished with taxes and your money is redistributed to others who are produce nothing. I hear this term "corporate welfare" thrown around by liberals but they never explain it. By corporate welfare do you mean the tax breaks Obama gave to "green energy" corporations like GE that has never produced any energy? The US has one of the highest corporate tax rates in the world! Do you think, maybe, just maybe that's why so many corporations leave the US and take their business to China? I hope this helps you.

RockOn
Spanish Fork, UT

To correct an imbalance, do you tear down one or build the other up? You can't build one up by taking from the other, only by increasing the opportunity for the lesser. And is this inequality leading to envy and jealousy or to a determination to work smarter and harder? If our system doesn't reward the later, it will spawn the former.

killpack
Sandy, UT

NYJazzFan,

News Flash. Corporations do not have police power. Congress does. Huge difference. If there are unfair policies in place, like 'corporate welfare,' only CONGRESS is to blame. Congress makes the laws of this land. Congress writes the ridiculously unfair, complex and special-interest serving tax code. Corporations have absolutely ZERO authority to make laws and throw people in jail. That authoritarian, police power lies strictly with Congress and The White House. Of course, corporations, however unsavory, will respond to the incentives placed in front of them. They'll pay whatever bribes for the lawmakers to get out of their way or even give them a handout like AIG, GM and Solyndra. But ultimately it is the lawmakers who decide the law of this land and the consequences for breaking it, not corporations. Corporations own the media? Are you nuts? Excepting FoxNews, the mainstream media is the propaganda arm of our authoritarian, anti-business, class warfare-inciting central government in Washington DC. Take the above story for instance. Maybe you should reread it.

PGVikingDad
Pleasant Grove, UT

Oh, good grief. OF COURSE there is greater "inequality" between the top fifth and the bottom fifth of earners in the U.S. than in Pakistan and the Ivory Coast. In those two countries, 97% of the population is poverty-stricken. The top fifth makes nothing, and the bottom fifth makes nothing. But at least they're equal, right? Absolute nonsense. How 'bout we compare the bottom fifth of the U.S. to the top fifth of Pakistan and the Ivory Coast? Does that put things in a different light?

Stalwart Sentinel
San Jose, CA

Reality - There is factual, demonstrable increasing income inequality since Reagan's policies have been enacted. Poor are doing worse, rich are doing better, rich have effective access to Congress via lobbyists while the poor do not, the rich heavily skew rules/laws in their favor to the detriment of the poor. Union strength is down, income disparity is up. CEO pay is up, share of respective tax burden is down.

Conservative group think - Complain corporations are taxed too much while those same corporations own the media outlets, complain the media outlets have anti-business, anti-conservative bias even though they are owned by the corporations. Somehow don't consider the leading news outlet to be "mainstream." Consider what was once a patriotic act when it was a higher rate (paying taxes) to be stealing and looting now that the amount for wealthy Americans is far less, complain that an unfair system kills work ethic (have they no pride or honor?), and then accuse the poor of having no work ethic in the most unbalanced society America has ever seen. The irony is palpable.

Grundle
West Jordan, UT

This article points out the disparity of wealth but does not point out the value and possession of the current wealth base.

The question I would ask is not what the wealth gap is, but rather, what is the current average value of the wealth currently possessed. In other words, is the average income family of today more or less wealthy in terms of resources they have access to versus the same family 50 years ago.

I would suspect in terms of housing, medical care, nutrition, transportation, entertainment, and many other metrics, that the average family in our country today has greater access than at any other time or place in history.

UtahBlueDevil
Durham, NC

@Mountainman - let me explain corporate welfare for you then. When a corporation the size of GE pays next to no income tax because of specially craft tax credits - that is corporate welfare. When a friend of mine owns over 30 properties, but gets to show a negative income through tax loop holes - that is corporate welfare.

I don't see how anyone can't see this as a problem. 30 years ago the average exec made 40 times his average employee. The number currently is 400 times. I don't care what justification you try, that change is going to have a drastic impact on how employees see their employers.

@worf - again, you have completely missed the point here. We are not talking about top exec to the janitor wage differences, we are talking top to even middle management and professionals. The gap is hitting every level of organizations. I don't know anyone is saying that the lowest ranking person should be raised to the upper level incomes... the is a pure red hearing argument. It is that companies used to be about products, long term viability, and serving their customers. Long term investments have been replaced with short term returns.

frugalfly
PULLMAN, WA

GDP has increased 250-300 percent in the last 30 years so it isn't like the wealthy top 1/5 are taking any more than the same percentage of increases they have created in the economy...I'd have an issue with the wealthy taking a higher percentage if they hadn't grown the economy but they have and thus they are taking directly in proportion to the growth of the economy. The real question is if you didn't have the tax relief of the 1980's would you have ever had the GDP growth of the last 30 years? I would postulate NO! The difference between views in this country is that liberals think that "fair share" means that those who save and produce should provide more because of "fairness" which is really envy/entitlement. I don't care how much the rich make or pay. What ever they can do to earn wealth and save on expenses (taxes) the more power to them. The move toward Socialism/Communism has only produced more poverty. Liberty and opportunity doesn't guarantee outcome, it never has. It only guarantees potential incentive for talent, skill, ambition, good fortune, and risk.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments