Nothing like building your argument on a horribly false premise. Congrats on being a moron.


Make an argument that doesn't require you to assume that income inequality is a result of one person making 10 widgets and another making 10^10 widgets and maybe we can have a discussion. Until then your argument is about as relevant as what you had for breakfast.

 

-----signature-----

Are you even reading what I write?

Is your screen busted?

You are causing income inequality by causing an over supply of low skill labor. It is the oversupply of low skilled labor that is the primary cause of low wages for low skilled labor.

Your subject line doesn't say income inequality though. It says economic inequality. Productivity is a part of that but is a separate issue to income inequality. You are pointedly ignoring it because you have nothing but rationalizations on that topic.

 

-----signature-----

fixed for accuracy

to fix income equality, remove the printing press from the government

 

-----signature-----

 

-----signature-----

Your post is too stupid to respond to seriously.

 

-----signature-----

I'm not connecting all of your dots. What is it you want to say about income inequality? That it increases volatility? Where does dependency come in in terms of volatility?

 

-----signature-----

Income inequality leads to increased volatility because the income of the rich is more volatile. This is mostly because it is more closely connected to financial markets which are volatile.


Dependency comes in for two reasons. 1) Increased volatility means more people need help to survive the economic cycle and 2) income inequality means more people need help regardless of the economic cycle because they have less even when they are working.

 

-----signature-----

Nvm answered

Bear with me, but consider the US as having two economies. There is a volatile, fluctuating, vibrant economy that at this time is doing rather well all things considered. We have stock market/bonds/equities ratcheting higher and higher, we have M&As up the ass, we have growth, we have potential for more growth, we have national and international businesses expanding, we have an increase in the rate at which money is changing hands. The other part of the economy is dependent, flat, closed, whose major portion of money exchange is relegated to receiving funds from the government and buying essentials [or what we hope are essentials]. I know this is overly-simplistic, but the point I'm trying to make is that it will be increasingly impossible to tap one economy to support the other because its all drag and I do not see these two economies merging anytime soon. There are far far far too many barriers.

 

-----signature-----

Honestly that view makes little to no sense to me. I am not even sure you are talking about production or consumption. There seem to be two worlds, government and the financial services world. IMO they are really both side shows to the two major gears of the economy which are consumption and production.


Capital markets are meant to help serve the expansion of production and facilitate consumption. There has been major dysfunction in the capital markets in the US which includes massive mistakes made by private interests and interference by the US government and other foreign parties.


The changes that are really great are changes in productivity. The growth of productivity of the other nations, specifically China, has drastically increased global production. In the US production has also increased in the form of increases in technology. These changes in production have pushed down the labor market and helped the capital markets. In addition the labor markets have been hurt by hundreds of billions of dollars being bought by foreign interests. This helps people in those industries and have helped grow those industries but at the expense of domestic production and consumption related to that production. This also means more and more consumption is dependent on foreign investment instead of US production.


In terms of just the US this has meant decades of growing economic inequality which feeds into government as I previously mentioned. Government is also not the horrible thing some people think it is. The blanket statement that government run means less efficient is clearly false when you look at health care.

 

-----signature-----