How does Sup Forums feel about the rising income inequality in the United States? Should wages rise with productivity...

How does Sup Forums feel about the rising income inequality in the United States? Should wages rise with productivity, or is our current system okay?

Other urls found in this thread:

bls.gov/opub/btn/volume-2/average-food-prices-a-snapshot-of-how-much-has-changed-over-a-century.htm
tradingeconomics.com/united-states/food-inflation
aei.org/publication/think-food-is-more-expensive-today-than-in-the-past-its-not-its-now-cheaper-than-ever-before/
ers.usda.gov/data-products/food-expenditures.aspx
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

related

Also related. Have banks ruined the country?

income inequality makes sense since the ethnic make up is changing

But 90% of the country isn't non-white, and a good amount of the people in the top 1/10 of 1% are not white(they are Jewish). The statistics don't line up with what you're saying.

Why is Sup Forums incapable of having a real economic discussion?
posting tits as a last ditch effort to save the thread

you're all fucking retards

The worker's contribution to productivity is increasingly marginal as automation take over. Why should a person be entitled to pay that another could do cheaper?

Nice stats user

Because as income concentrates at the very top, the rest of the country becomes more reliant on welfare programs like food stamps, medicaid, and section 8 housing in order to survive. If trickle down economics actually worked and more money actually went to the workers, then there would be less people suckling on the government teet. That's why I think we should get rid of all of those welfare programs, because once a bunch of kids start starving/freezing to death, our ruling class would be forced to actually pay people a living wage or risk complete chaos.

so autism and you post a fat whore. Waste of a thread.

Not an argument.

The divergence starts shortly after the Immigration Act of 1965 that shifted immigration from a small group primarily composed of Europeans to a large group of people from the third world who were willing to work for peanuts.

$100 an hour minimum wage

now!

see

That's not true at all, it assumes that the cost of necessities as a percentage of the total GDP is static, which is obviously not true.

It's tearing this country apart. Turning it into a 3rd world shithole.

No it doesn't.

...

That's only because of rent and government intervention in supporting (((city centers))). All other necessities (food, water, etc) are cheaper thanks to automation.

Fuck off chubby chaser.

incorrect
bls.gov/opub/btn/volume-2/average-food-prices-a-snapshot-of-how-much-has-changed-over-a-century.htm

Adjust for inflation

>All other necessities (food, water, etc) are cheaper thanks to automation.
tradingeconomics.com/united-states/food-inflation

I hate to be a Bernie Sanders cuck but no it's fucked. I don't think having a huge increase of taxation on the rich to raise the minimum wage is even a bad idea and by rich I don't mean 100k+ a year I'm talking 1,000k or more a year.

A return to 50s style tax brackets would fix a lot of things. If a CEO's income above a certain threshold is taxed a ridiculously high amount, then there's no reason to give him as much money, and that money would be available for paying the actual workers.

From your source, food inflation has been overall decreasing over the last decade. Dollar inflation has not.

As an old fuck, can anyone correlate what occurred when the income equality started rising?

>hint.....they came from a different country

you'd have to return to 50s demographic as well, not considering that economy has drastically changed since that time

>importing high-skilled, high-pay workers from India and elsewhere hurts the income of American jerbs

As long as my rates stay about the same or decrease I couldn't care less.

Kek the republicans had like 8 years to come up with anything and yet they proposed nothing. Fucking pathetic. This further bolsters my idea that the republicans have no fucking clue what they are doing

Fiat currency needs to die.

It's fine. Productivity is going up because of technological advancement, not increased effort.

>Estonia
You can join this discussion when you have a North American IP.

how do you feel about this?

meanwhile food inflation is on the rise
>b-but it's fallen in the past 10 years

Not relative to currency inflation. If currency inflation outpaces food inflation, it means food is cheaper to purchase.

false attribution of efficiency to worker productivity. productivity has an upper limit and we basically have been there for a long time. however, new inventions and strategies, which come from technical fields and management, should not increase worker wages

This is a problem of overpopulation and allowing city centers to dominate state politics. You can tax the rich all you want, doesn't change the fact that only so many human bodies can fit into a specific valley or other geographical feature.

Okay, last question. Why are you an apologist for our kike-run economy? Or you Jewish yourself, or do you just like how they operate?

>wages should rise with productivity

I work in a factory with machinery that produces stuff. New machinery is far more productive and easier to use than old machinery. The divergence in productivity and wages is not unfair, since it is due to technological advances.

>automation is because of muh Jews
Fuck off, the only one falling into the kike's trap is you. Rather than improving yourself you seek to blame competition and depend on (((government protection))). Filthy little Marxist kike.

>current inflation = 2.40
>previous inflation = 2.70
drop (DOWN)
>current food inflation = 0.50
>previous food inflation = 0.00
raise (UP)

0.5 is a much smaller number than either 2.4 or 2.7.

Its a result of the federal reserve and inflation. everything is more expensive but we all make around the same amount in actual value as people did in the late 60's, which was the same time we went off the gold standard.

they convinced us, somehow, that instead of working for gold which retains value to work for funny money worth ???

get rid of the fed, deal with the ramifications, which will be drastic and terrible, and things will go back to normal...back to where you could go to college, buy a home, and raise a family on what we call $50k a year in our funny money.

Jews are capitalist, retard. Kikes are the living embodiment of corporate greed. They love money more than anything, and they've set up a financial system that benefits them to the detriment of the rest of the country, and then they use racism to divide the races, and anti-racism to cause division within the races themselves(same thing with sexism and feminism), so we're all focused on fighting with each other instead of our Jewish rulers.

It's more to do with (((immigration))).

Went off the gold standard and financialized the economy. USA also became a net oil importer around that time, when our production peaked.

The US working class has suffered compared to the asset owners. But all Americans have enjoyed the "exorbitant privilege" of exporting inflation to the rest of the world, effectively taxing everyone who holds dollars -- which, until quite recently, was every nation purchasing oil.

Every year the US receives thousands of huge containers full of commodities, textiles, electronics, consumer goods... and in return we send out Federal Reserve Notes.

Not a bad gig! It's an under appreciated perk of empire. But how much longer will it last?

>0.5 is less than 0.3
Are you really this retarded?

Anyone that isn't a failure is a capitalist.
Sort of. Illegals don't occupy high-demand land, they huddle in shitty ghettos. Wealthy immigrants certainly increase the cost of housing, but wealthy immigrants are a very small portion of our nation's population.

The real problem is with kikes and chinks that engage in rent-seeking modes of income. We need to address all the idiots that believe (((homeownership is an investment))). I'm fairly libertarian, but I support increased property taxes for non-abode housing.

I'm referring to overall inflation, the independent changes mean nothing out of context. To put it another way, imagine you have $100 in your pocket. One day, that $100 is now worth $90 in previous-day-dollars. At the same time, a gizmo you want to buy goes from costing $100 to $101 dollars, in previous-day-dollars. Which hurts you more, dollar inflation or gizmo inflation?

>Jews are capitalist
>Capitalism is an economic system based on private ownership of the means of production and their operation for profit.

So if we collectivize the means of production, surely the Jews would be hurt by this. There is no way Jews could get into government positions and once again gain control of the means of production.

redpill me on our federal reserve notes. Is it basically a big boys version of international currency but for nationstates? cause i remember someone saying that the reason the u.s takes on all this debt is that. It's in a position to do so idk if that's true. But what are Federal reserve notes and how do they work annon?

Capitalism can work if it's tempered by regulations. Outlaw lobbying and reverse Citizens United, and don't allow politicians to vote on bills that would result in their own financial gain, and you would basically assure that the regulations and legislation wouldn't benefit these Jewish fucks like they do now.

>federal reserve notes
Open your wallet. Take out a dollar bill. You are now holding a federal reserve note.

Jesus dude, I seriously hope you're trolling.

I hope you are. I've explained it in technical terms as much as I am willing, here is a link for your perusal if you feel so inclined:

aei.org/publication/think-food-is-more-expensive-today-than-in-the-past-its-not-its-now-cheaper-than-ever-before/
>In 1982, spending on food by individuals and families represented 8.3% of disposable personal income. By 1992, spending on food had fallen to 7% of income, and by 2002 to 5.9%, and by 2011 (last year available) to only 5.7%. (Those are the years used in the interactive grocery simulator by Marketplace.)

Income inequality is a complete nonissue that gets ridiculously blown out of proportion. From a macro perspective, the only legitimate economic problem with income inequality is its link with a more volatile economy. As for the idea that wages should rise with productivity, this is not the optimal solution. If productivity is increasing, assuming there is no collusion the company that sells the product for the lowest price while still returning a profit wins. For example, if there are two identical products on the shelf A and B, product A costs $1 and product B pays their workers more, but costs $2 which product do you buy? The correct answer is to always buy product A and if you like the workers enough to consider buying product B, you give the dollar you saved back to the workers. Paying workers more would limit price reduction and create some degree of dead weight loss. Minor tangent, income statistics are useless. I think something like 56% of Americans are in the top 1% at some point in their life. If a bad case of the flu went around the United States that killed off a large portion of the elderly, there would be a massive spike in the 1%’s earnings for that year because inheritance is income. You will notice most graphs tracking the 1%’s wealth also tend to follow the housing market, this is because if you sell your house it is income.

ok maybe should include pic then. i was asking more to what these are and how they work. What function do they serve? What is their purpose? and what's their role on the international stage of economics?

gee, i wonder what could be the cause

you fucking liberals caused this

Just one more so you don't lose focus, read table 7

ers.usda.gov/data-products/food-expenditures.aspx

Food prices have decreased literally almost every single year since the mid 30s.

You liberals never respond to image attached, you cannot comprehend the damage social security has down.

That note is equivalent to a million of the one dollar notes. Federal reserve note is just another way to say dollar bill or banknote.

our current system is not good. The gap between productivity and wages can be easily filled with immigrants, the products are already there but the employees can't buy them.

I already said that we should get rid of social safety nets, as they do nothing but make people complacent.

>Capitalism can work if it's tempered by regulations.

Ah right, like social security right? Good job, you've denied generation wealth accumulation to all the lower clases.

Excellent infographic, saved.

We will innovate ourselves into extinction

"The conservatives are fools: They whine about the decay of traditional values, yet they enthusiastically support technological
progress and economic growth. Apparently it never occurs to them that you can't make rapid, drastic changes in the technology and the economy of a society with out causing rapid changes in all other aspects of the society as well, and that such rapid changes inevitably break down traditional values."

Ted did nothing wrong

Economic inequality exists because humans are unequal.

Social security isn't a business regulation, retard.

One last time, then I'm done.

The value of a dollar (due to fluctuating inflation) is now 30 cents better than it was yesterday.
The value of a good (due to fluctuating inflation) is now 50 cents worse than it was yesterday.

Which day would have I gotten more for my dollar when buying these goods?

>"""automation"""

Oh, so I'm not forced to pay the full FICA tax when self-employed? Businesses arn't required to file all the bullshit paper work to pay their half of FICA taxes?
Furthermore, social security is not a "safety net" in the slightest. It is one of the grandest thefts in American history. Most of the economic growth the top 10% got was through capital gains, i.e. investment income. Social security is nothing more than a ponzi scheme that denies the poor the chance to invest.

The dollar is not 30 cents better today. It's 30 cents less bad today than it was if you compared the loss in value of the dollar yesterday to that of that day before yesterday. Overall, it's still 240 cents worse today, compared to a good which is 50 cents worse.

I don't like it, either, and to suggest that I do is just strawman bullshit. Please actually argue against the points I'm making, not ones that you think I would make and already have arguments prepared for. We both agree on social security being shit, so let's talking about something else.

this.

As the population increases, the entrepreneur's contribution potential to the economy increases. But a CNA decades ago can only do about the same as a CNA now. Same with an auto technician. Tooling and tech might help their productivity capacity go up linearly, but for entrepreneurs, it's exponential, because population growth is exponential.

>"""automation"""

I mean, are you seriously arguing that we are in a state of deflation right now? We only really see deflation during recessions. The dollar is almost always worth less today than a previous day; that is by the design of our banking system which uses inflation to bankroll unsustainable public projects.

Also, people who feel entitled to the earnings of an entity of than themselves deserve a helicopter ride. And societies which cave and assuage them inevitably get fucked as new generations values slowly shift toward degeneracy.

Well, my main point is that most of the lost growth in income corresponds to the social security tax. I guarantee you if people were forced to invest their social security taxes into a 401k, income inequality wouldn't be a problem.

You don't think automation will eventually hurt illegals too? Right now we're at a point where even Chinese labor is more expensive than robot labor, for certain products. The real problem is that people keep having children they can't support; a family of median income with a median number of children is still a net loss on the economy.

it's in the best interests of a nation to keep income inequality at acceptable levels
when a certain tipping point is reached, you'll have a revolution

Explain the Arab world or much of SEA then.

Revolution only happens when the poor are actually starving or oppressed. As long as they have their basic needs satisfied, and maybe a bit of television or whatever to entertain them, they don't need anything more.

INCOME INEQUALITY IS GOOD BECAUSE THE RICH NEED TO GET ALL THE MONEY. FUCK THE THE WORKERS THEY DON'T NEED HIGHER WAGES, THE RICH NEED ALL THE MONEY.

T. TRUMP VOTER

automation isn't the sole reason of more efficiency and the suffering of low class people. Also no, I don't think the jobs spics currently do are in danger of being "automated" anytime soon. Automation is something happening in the factory environment.

This might also be true. I can hear the people sing.

But let's delve further. When this has happened, has it been because of wealth inequality, or because of disparagingly bad living standards?

If my options are starve to death, or revolt, I suppose I'll revolt...but if I can still afford a TV, am I gonna revolt? No one dies of starvation in the US. Might the increased living standards of the poor negate a revolt?

That's gross.

>We will innovate ourselves into extinction

yes

we will innovate ourselves out of existence

beat me to it.

i don't really care about economics, i just don't want my whole city overrun with mexican immigrants

the arab spring caught all economists by surprise actually
basic needs are satisfied, somewhat strong growth (GDP)
but a middle class revolution occurred anyway... due to income inequality - they organized their chimpouts via facebook ffs

sea doesn't have severe income inequality though
not like our oligarchs or whoever are that rich... well, except indonesia

this
couple it with some chances for the better inhabitants and you have almost 0 chance of uprising

>automation isn't the sole reason of more efficiency
Elaborate. If robots aren't more efficient at producing goods than humans, why do companies even use them?
>and the suffering of low class people. Also no, I don't think the jobs spics currently do are in danger of being "automated" anytime soon. Automation is something happening in the factory environment.
True, not all jobs are automatable, but many are. The poor really aren't suffering that much; overall median wages+benefits have only barely declined relative to the absolute peak in the 70s. Those complaining the most are usually entitled union types that actually make above-average income.
Arab Spring was a globalist covert military operation.

ITT: Good goys who accept the neo-liberal globalist cock

(((Friedman))) really did a work on the minds of your average American who just blindly accepts their fate as a slave

>Should wages rise with productivity,
no costs should come down

Define "slave", and show me a single nation that hasn't always been full of them.

>jewing this hard

I think that so long as liberals attempt to propagate the leech classes nobody should be surprised that we have rising income inequality. It has nothing to do with production and everything to do with a certain political movement that brought 20 million people with no marketable skills over the border.

As standard of living goes up, the amount of people willing to revolt will decrease, all "inequality" aside.

If less people are willing to revolt, revolt will be less successful.

Either way, so as not to pretend I'm sentimentless in this whole discussion, fuck the poor. They're mostly inferior retards, and victims of themselves; their low IQs, and their low self control.

Source: I've been a slumlord for 8 years.

>Elaborate. If robots aren't more efficient at producing goods than humans, why do companies even use them?
of course robots are more efficient for some jobs, mostly factory jobs

most people don't work in assembly lines though, in many cases things have been made more efficient without robots or automation.

Remember that 43% of the top 1% are jews. You need to cool it with that antisemitism goy.