62% Put Economic Growth Ahead of Economic Fairness
Jul 19, 2012 11:25:41 #
Voters view economic growth as much more important than economic fairness and think Mitt Romney favors growth while President Obama is more focused on fairness...http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/july_2012/62_put_economic_growth_ahead_of_economic_fairness
Jul 20, 2012 05:56:29 #
Life isn't fair and never has been. Let those of us who made good life choices and earn a good living - legally, spend our earning as we see fit. The government is the worst possible repository for our hard earned money.
Let those who need help request it through private agencies created for those needing assistance. The government only squanders our tax money with little or no oversight.
Let those who need help request it through private agencies created for those needing assistance. The government only squanders our tax money with little or no oversight.
Jul 20, 2012 06:36:41 #
Who decides fair? The universe does not give a steaming heap about fair. While I'm busy getting mine, you're out to get yours.
Jul 20, 2012 09:26:42 #
Snert wrote:
Who decides fair? The universe does not give a steaming heap about fair. While I'm busy getting mine, you're out to get yours.
Exactly my point too . Thank you .
BUT remenber he said that " You did not get this alone " LOC !!!
Jul 20, 2012 09:46:22 #
Jul 20, 2012 09:49:53 #
docrob
Loc: Durango, Colorado
Archy wrote:
Voters view economic growth as much more important than economic fairness and think Mitt Romney favors growth while President Obama is more focused on fairness...http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/july_2012/62_put_economic_growth_ahead_of_economic_fairness
and Rasmussen has an axe so big it takes him and Rush and Hannity to lift it
Jul 20, 2012 09:49:57 #
docrob
Loc: Durango, Colorado
Archy wrote:
Voters view economic growth as much more important than economic fairness and think Mitt Romney favors growth while President Obama is more focused on fairness...http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/july_2012/62_put_economic_growth_ahead_of_economic_fairness
and Rasmussen has an axe so big it takes him and Rush and Hannity to lift it
Jul 20, 2012 12:17:10 #
Archy wrote:
Voters view economic growth as much more important than economic fairness and think Mitt Romney favors growth while President Obama is more focused on fairness...http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/july_2012/62_put_economic_growth_ahead_of_economic_fairness
What would be the use of a GDP that keeps growing, enriching only the top 1%, while actually impoverishing everyone else? On the other hand, what good is an economy that distributes its benefits equitably, but is constantly contracting?
Jul 20, 2012 14:23:27 #
ole sarg
Loc: south florida
With growth comes a degree of equality. They go hand in glove. This is a stupid question!
Let us rephrase the question: What do you prefer equality or inequality.
Let us rephrase the question: What do you prefer equality or inequality.
Jul 20, 2012 15:10:17 #
"With growth comes a degree of equality. They go hand in glove. This is a stupid question!"
With all due respect, OleSarge, in the last 35 years in the US there has been considerable economic growth. Because of an ever more regressive tax strutter and other right wing policies, however, the distribution of that income has become ever less equal. The bottom 75% of income earners during this time have lost 30-33% of their per capita share of the gross domestic product.
With all due respect, OleSarge, in the last 35 years in the US there has been considerable economic growth. Because of an ever more regressive tax strutter and other right wing policies, however, the distribution of that income has become ever less equal. The bottom 75% of income earners during this time have lost 30-33% of their per capita share of the gross domestic product.
Jul 20, 2012 15:18:54 #
ole sarg
Loc: south florida
PNagy what you say is true.
But, even though the middle class and the poor are getting screwed at least they have some income and although losing 30--33% much of this was in housing value and 401K and other lost retirement monies not to mention raises.
As the man said: Rich or poor its good to have money and in this case at least some money.
But, even though the middle class and the poor are getting screwed at least they have some income and although losing 30--33% much of this was in housing value and 401K and other lost retirement monies not to mention raises.
As the man said: Rich or poor its good to have money and in this case at least some money.
Jul 20, 2012 16:07:07 #
Archy wrote:
Voters view economic growth as much more important than economic fairness and think Mitt Romney favors growth while President Obama is more focused on fairness...http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/july_2012/62_put_economic_growth_ahead_of_economic_fairness
Whatever Obama is focused on, do the opposite. He's batting 1000 on every wrong issue anyone could ever see in a president. Being braindead is his speciality.
Jul 20, 2012 16:15:18 #
ole sarg
Loc: south florida
Heart interesting statement can you provide some evidence for what you say?
Jul 20, 2012 18:15:54 #
ole sarg wrote:
PNagy what you say is true.
But, even though the middle class and the poor are getting screwed at least they have some income and although losing 30--33% much of this was in housing value and 401K and other lost retirement monies not to mention raises.
As the man said: Rich or poor its good to have money and in this case at least some money.
But, even though the middle class and the poor are getting screwed at least they have some income and although losing 30--33% much of this was in housing value and 401K and other lost retirement monies not to mention raises.
As the man said: Rich or poor its good to have money and in this case at least some money.
It was more than housing losses. The 30-33% loss came before the record number of foreclosures, which I have not tracked. Quite simply, as the GDP increased, nearly all the additional wealth since 1982 has gone to the upper echelon.
Jul 20, 2012 18:50:21 #
ole sarg
Loc: south florida
That is for sure. The transfer of wealth is overwhelming. There is less capital for small business start ups but lots for Ferrari!
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.