UpstateNYUPSer(Ret)
Well-Known Member
It would have been nice had the chart listed the income ranges associated with each group.
Tooner, wait until the collision train on the next poll results, he'll be lucky to stay in 3rd place.
He's falling like someone that jumped out of a plane without a parachute !
proof is in the pudding...and you conservatives want more of this when you're not even close to the "classes" benefiting the most.
The how or why is fairly obvious if you just for once, started to think for yourself instead of having a political party do it for you.Seems to me, during both time periods in the graph both parties were at the reign of the government. The graph alone just supplies the end results and proves nothing on how or why. Basically meaningless without more detailed breakdowns.
It's pretty basic, the more money one has, the more they can invest and grow the bottom line and it can grow exponentially. With much less or nothing to invest there will be no or very little growth. As Upstate suggested, the actual income levels are important.
For example? I think we can easily gain that information with the most obvious, simple web search.It would have been nice had the chart listed the income ranges associated with each group.
The how or why is fairly obvious if you just for once, started to think for yourself instead of having a political party do it for you.
The how or why is fairly obvious if you just for once, started to think for yourself instead of having a political party do it for you.
I don't know what you were doing during the early to mid 70s but I was working for a living. I was in the medium income bracket for labor type jobs and feeding my family and supplying medical needs for a family of 4. While having everything we NEEDED, we still didn't have everything we wanted (but not complaining). That was during the "hay day" of the graph's high growth period. As comfortable of a living we had, I still chose to use my income above what was needed to acquire the things we wanted. This type of living kept me from investing and reaping the rewards. Had I wisely invested then I may have had more wealth growth by the 90s. Who do I have to blame for not being in one of those higher brackets on the chart?He is partial right : After taking away most of the income from the poor and middle class - they had no more money to save, therefor fell behind !
Or maybe they never saved in the first place............maybe they were irresponsible people. That stuff doesn't show on any chart!!He is partial right : After taking away most of the income from the poor and middle class - they had no more money to save, therefor fell behind !
I'm glad people are catching on. ;pWhen it comes to Republican presidential candidate Herman Cain's proposed 9-9-9 tax plan, there’s one thing all sides agree on: it’s very simple
When it comes to Republican presidential candidate Herman Cain's proposed 9-9-9 tax plan, there’s one thing all sides agree on: it’s very simple
It might be simple, but when it comes to getting the job done, he will have the brightest economists by his side and not just a bunch of his friends from the restaurant association. Together with the brightest, they will solve the problems and come up with real solutions.
Obama had a bunch of lawyer friends and their answer to everything is to sue.....including the states.
THIS is funny moreluck! In the debate, when asked to "SPECIFICALLY" name his economic advisors, CAIN said he had many. He was asked to name them and he could only come up with ONE NAMEafter repeating that he had many top economic people helping him.
Funny how none of their names could come to his mind when asked. He specifically name a man named RICH LOWRIE as his top economic advisor. HE said this "EXPERT" helped him craft his 999 plan. The only problem with this claim is that RICH LOWRIE ISNT AN EXPERT.
In fact, he is not even qualified as an economist.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1011/65713.html
CAIN when pressured at the debate skirted around having to name any other names and relied only on Lowries assistance.
LOWRIE, in no way qualified to direct the USA tax policy, shows how IG-nant Cain is on domestic policy.
So moreluck, before you go touting CAINS participation with experts, youd better brush up on what an expert economist is.
Peace.
Smart man....you don't show ALL your cards and you play what you have close to the vest. He has named 2 possible veep considerations. Not definite, but possible......but that won't stop you from making snide remarks about them.