Where Do the 47 Percent Live? | The American Conservative
* what a shocker they live in the low wage RTW for less wage states...
* what a shocker they live in the low wage RTW for less wage states...
-
Hello, this board in now turned off and no new posting.
Please REGISTER at Anabolic Steroid Forums, and become a member of our NEW community!
-
Check Out IronMag Labs® KSM-66 Max - Recovery and Anabolic Growth Complex
Where Do the 47 Percent Live?
- Thread starter LAM
- Start date
- Joined
- Dec 8, 2010
- Messages
- 5,540
- Reaction score
- 2,556
- Points
- 0
And what a shocker, those same states are loaded with uneducated Hispanics and blacks.
seriously, obama won because of these morons???
and uneducated highly religious whites, the exact opposite traits of the high wage blue states.
below are the states with the most blacks. don't you get tired of being wrong about everything?
#1 - New York
#2 - Florida
#3 - Georgia
#4 - Texas
#5 - California
#6 - Illinois
#7 - North Carolina
#8 - Maryland
#9 - Louisiana
#10 - Michigan
Interesting link on the 47% and the pop figures by LAM.
conservative economic policy only results in two things , increased debt which fuels the US financial sector and poverty for the working class and that is what all the empirical data shows. the good GOP party was killed off when the radicals (neo-cons) took over in the 70's and took the GOP further right then it's ever been in US history.
[/h]
seriously, obama won because of these morons???
Hahahaha!!!!! Thats hilarious
IRONMAGLABS.COM
USE DISCOUNT CODE: tami15 for 15% off
longworthb
Banned Member
irish_2003
Board Rep
if we don't keep the poor down, then how are us working people supposed to live and feel like it's all worth it? not everyone deserves everything...there's a reason for rich, middle, and poor...it's the way it's supposed to be to balance things out...
I agree with this, but the problem is we are in a consumption based economy. The people who have all of the money have it because they are smart with it, which is not good for the economy. The poor folk spend it all and they hoard it. There is a finite amount of money left over for the poor and middle class and when the poor spends all of theirs consumption grinds to a halt. Since people are buying less, the job creators lay people off which increases the ranks of the poor. If the government wasn't there to give handouts the remaining people eventually become jobless and you have a small group of people with all of the money and a large group of people with nothing.
capitalism does that naturally. but when you add in a rigged financial sector it is no longer a function of the markets and of capitalism. when Nixon took the USD completely fiat it was the beginning of the end for the dollar and for the working class in the US. when the FED started to double the monetary base in the US in the early 80s they (financial sector and capitalists at the top) devalued the "money" that the working class uses and is paid with and monetized everything else in the US economy. the dollar is the form of money that labor primarily uses with some credit available to those with high enough incomes, capital has credit and a dozen other forms of "money" which it can use to spend and buy goods and services.
and that is what most people don't get. the rules where changed in the middle of the game. rules that only benefited a small percentage of the population. and this why the US financial sector is nothing but a bunch of bullshit and why the FED needed to loan them 16T in 2009. most of the forms of "money" in use by finance is not a commodity but equity based assets, which means they are not tangible and only have value when exchanged or used by one capitalist to another..
Bowden
Elite Member
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2009
- Messages
- 1,798
- Reaction score
- 736
- Points
- 0
irish_2003
Board Rep
LAM i think i get what you're saying...i was having similar discussion with a moderate voting friend tonight about what most don't understand is that rich people don't always have everything liquid and cash...so making them pay more they'd actually have to start selling off assets to get the cashflow...and when they start selling off, the values of things drop and everyone suffers then...
don't bother you turned your brain off decades ago, you'll have beans in your ears till the day your planted. critical thinking to an ideologue such as yourself is like a blind, deaf, mute quadruple amputee trying to shoot skeet, impossible...
Got any evidence of this?
- Joined
- May 26, 2006
- Messages
- 5,633
- Reaction score
- 832
- Points
- 113
- Age
- 38
Fixed!
the RTW states are less populated and if you check the BLS you will see the jobs causing that increase are in healthcare which pay higher than the US median wage. wages for men have stagnated in many sectors and those wages for jobs like RN's, etc. typically held by women are paying higher wages.
while the unemployment numbers from the BLS are obviously skewed since jobs that have been off-shored are not counted as losses. the data on the types of jobs and the wages in each state are pretty accurate.
that's not what I said at all and you have no clue about different classes of assets. and the only asset that the working class owns is the home which just took a 40% hit in 2008, that loss never to be recovered. that asset was safe until the changes in capital gains in TRA97 which turned the home from a long term investment into a short term commodity, hence the increased volatility of housing prices.
rich people don't want cash or need, especially not USDs. why would you want to hold onto something that losses it's value at 25% a decade? same reason why the wealthy are not large depositors into banks. why would you put your savings (which is nothing more than future consumption) in a US bank where you earn interest several points below the inflation rate? key interest rates on deposit accounts are inversely proportional to bond yields.
irish_2003
Board Rep
i just don't want the poor people to keep getting handouts...i'm all for genocide at this point
Median wages are higher in non-RTW states but the question is what effect(change) does RTW have and right now RTW states are seeing better income changes.
we are all poor compared to somebody else...
Right To Work for less, then?
#1 - most people are lazy and really don't like learning new things especially if it takes a lot of effort.
#2 - ideologues can't handle the truth or any evidence that goes against their belief system despite overwhelming evidence, they discount all of it. the reality they have made up their heads is what dictates what information is fact or non-fact.
I'm talking about the rate change of income as function of right to work with respect to time. delta(income/time)/delta(time) = income acceleration. It's not a counting problem. Let me know if you still don't get it.
