Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Mainstream Politics and Economics -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: koan who wrote (51782)	8/26/2013 7:16:34 PM
From: TimF	1 Recommendation Recommended By FJB Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 85487

We are 65th in the world in income inequality. That's your other mantra, and its similarly irrelevant. You are of course always free to change the topic, but you should present it as a new topic. You follow that statement with "what you say is wrong" when it isn't, and when "65th in income inequality" has nothing to do with the issue. Beyond irrelevant its also unimportant. The poor in the US are far better off than 65th in the world. Depending on how you define "poor" and what measures your looking at to measure it, they could even be top 10, almost certainly at least top 25. The inequality is by rich people in the US on the average being richer than rich people in other countries. This extra wealth and income is positive not negative. T0he middle class has been decimated No it hasn't. Overall the middle class is better off than it was in the past (unless your definition of past is rather short term and your just looking to the peak of a recent economic cycle, not over the decades and generations). It is apparently a slightly smaller percentage of the people in the country, but that's more from people moving up out of the middle class then people moving down out of it. Another example of something you decry largely being a positive thing not a negative.

To: koan who wrote (51782)	8/26/2013 8:16:50 PM
From: sm1th	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 85487

We are 65th in the world in income inequality. You can never explain why that is bad. The philosophy that demands equality is communism. Are you admitting to being a communist?

To: koan who wrote (51782)	9/8/2013 12:19:53 PM
From: TimF	1 Recommendation Recommended By Paul Smith Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 85487

Shock poll: Wealthy, not middle class, support Obama By PAUL BEDARD \| MAY 1, 2013 AT 5:10 PM President Obama's approval numbers are starting to mimic Mitt Romney's. According to a new Economist/YouGov poll, it's the rich -- not the poor or middle class -- who back Obama more despite his 2012 campaign attacking the rich. The poll found that fewer than half of those with incomes less than $100,000 per year approve of Obama's performance, while he enjoys a 54 percent approval rating among those with incomes higher than that. Those earning less than $40,000 a year disapprove of the president's performance, 51 percent to 45 percent. Those earning $40,000 to $100,000 disapprove by a rate of 50 percent to 48 percent... washingtonexaminer.com ...While President Obama campaigned for tax increases on wealthy Americans, his policies have favored the wealthy. Unaccountable subsidies for companies — including the bankrupt solar company Solyndra – take money from American taxpayers and give it to wealthy investors. These subsidized business owners were among Obama’s biggest campaign donors during the 2012 election... ...Disapproval from poor and middle class voters has many convinced that the country is heading in the wrong direction. Nearly 60 percent of adults believe the United States is on the wrong track. Only 27 percent support the current direction of the country. capitalisminstitute.org Its not really so much "his policies favor the wealthy", as they favor the wealthy he likes. He wants to take from those he doesn't like and give to those he does.