Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Pew Social Trends)   I don't want to shock any of you, but the rich have gotten richer and the poor have gotten poorer   (pewsocialtrends.org ) divider line
    More: Sad, wealth distribution, Census Bureau, Pew Research Center  
•       •       •

1564 clicks; posted to Business » on 24 Apr 2013 at 10:12 AM (3 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



68 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2013-04-24 09:27:09 AM  
Poor people whine about a lack of social mobility, so we give it to them, and then they whine about that. What's it going to take to shut them up?
 
2013-04-24 09:29:16 AM  
And Leon's getting larger.

img43.imageshack.us
 
2013-04-24 09:52:47 AM  
The rich get richer, the poor get the picture.
 
2013-04-24 10:17:18 AM  
Obama's fault.
 
2013-04-24 10:18:57 AM  

rumpelstiltskin: Poor people whine about a lack of social mobility, so we give it to them, and then they whine about that. What's it going to take to shut them up?


+1
 
2013-04-24 10:27:13 AM  
So what's the ETA on our GINI coeffecient reaching 1.00?
2024?

/This would be acceptable if I was the one guy with all the money.
 
2013-04-24 10:33:48 AM  
Just throw down some parks and everyone will be happy.
 
2013-04-24 10:37:23 AM  
Well, yes, that is what happens when the DJIA and S&P gain 50% in four years. Poor people don't own much in stock. If it makes you feel better, the wealthy lost all of the volatile wealth before gaining it back.
 
2013-04-24 10:43:42 AM  
Poor people buy shiat they don't need.

Rich people make the shiat that poor people buy.

Outrage?
 
2013-04-24 10:45:42 AM  

Tommy Moo: Well, yes, that is what happens when the DJIA and S&P gain 50% in four years. Poor people don't own much in stock. If it makes you feel better, the wealthy lost all of the volatile wealth before gaining it back.


No, it doesn't make anyone feel better, because those poor poor wealthy people you talked about fired all the poor people, and haven't re-hired any of the back yet.  As I understand it, they did this because Obama is a socialist.
 
2013-04-24 10:50:15 AM  
Look, libs, if the poor are too lazy to lobby for favorable tax policy then that's their problem.
 
2013-04-24 10:57:53 AM  

The Stealth Hippopotamus: Just throw down some parks and everyone will be happy.


Panem et Circenses.

As long as the underclass has the latest shiny thing in their hands, American Idol on TV, and some stupid sporting event they can attend to distract them, things are working precisely as planned.  Let's also keep at each other's throats about abortion, gay marriage, drugs, and the separation of church and state.  Those things will make our lives of indentured servitude much more bearable.

We (Americans) are officially idiots.
 
2013-04-24 11:00:04 AM  
The numbers they show are a bit misleading.  It says nothing on social mobility.  There were some poor people that became rich, and some rich people that became poor.  It wasn't the same 7% of people at the top.
 
2013-04-24 11:02:46 AM  

AngryDragon: The Stealth Hippopotamus: Just throw down some parks and everyone will be happy.

Panem et Circenses.

As long as the underclass has the latest shiny thing in their hands, American Idol on TV, and some stupid sporting event they can attend to distract them, things are working precisely as planned.  Let's also keep at each other's throats about abortion, gay marriage, drugs, and the separation of church and state.  Those things will make our lives of indentured servitude much more bearable.

We (Americans) are officially idiots.


img266.imageshack.us
should have said plop down some parks. maybe that would have helped
 
2013-04-24 11:09:52 AM  

The Stealth Hippopotamus: AngryDragon: The Stealth Hippopotamus: Just throw down some parks and everyone will be happy.

Panem et Circenses.

As long as the underclass has the latest shiny thing in their hands, American Idol on TV, and some stupid sporting event they can attend to distract them, things are working precisely as planned.  Let's also keep at each other's throats about abortion, gay marriage, drugs, and the separation of church and state.  Those things will make our lives of indentured servitude much more bearable.

We (Americans) are officially idiots.

[img266.imageshack.us image 512x372]
should have said plop down some parks. maybe that would have helped


That's the thing about humor, it's usually rooted in reality.
 
2013-04-24 11:10:21 AM  
Praise God for bailouts and quantitative easing.
 
2013-04-24 11:15:16 AM  

dognose4: The numbers they show are a bit misleading.  It says nothing on social mobility.  There were some poor people that became rich, and some rich people that became poor.  It wasn't the same 7% of people at the top.


upload.wikimedia.org
 
2013-04-24 11:16:46 AM  

dognose4: The numbers they show are a bit misleading.  It says nothing on social mobility.  There were some poor people that became rich, and some rich people that became poor.  It wasn't the same 7% of people at the top.


And by some you mean very few.

/usa's social/income mobility is pathetic
 
2013-04-24 11:37:39 AM  

AngryDragon: That's the thing about humor, it's usually rooted in reality.


Well the new patch is out, so more tourists should show up


/beating this joke to death
//a bloody messy death
 
2013-04-24 11:38:22 AM  
Capitalism is a linear system, and we're seeing the end of it. Once you "win" there is nowhere else to go.
But whattaya gonna do? The game is rigged against anyone not born into it. You simply cannot reach high places (unless you win the lottery, and I'm including becoming a movie star, etc, in the lottery category, because it's all luck).

Thank God I live in Canada, where it's *EGADS* more SOCIALIST than America. It's so scary when you read into the income disparity that has happened, and will continue to get worse... because things are moving as they were designed to. The system is working, it's working perfectly. It's just not working in the sense that people think about when they bring to mind a "free country".

Well it'll at least be interesting to see what happens. When it truly is the end-game, bad things are going to take place. History teaches us again and again you can only keep the populace down for so long. Rinse and repeat, etc.
 
2013-04-24 11:38:49 AM  
I'm actually not shocked at all, subby. Mostly because that statement is largely a myth and is meaningless without accounting for income mobility.
 
kab
2013-04-24 11:54:11 AM  

gretzkyscores: myth


Good job citing a source who's numbers stopped in 1991.
 
2013-04-24 11:56:26 AM  

gretzkyscores: Mostly because that statement is largely a myth


A youtube link to a video posted by LearnLiberty.org.....

Never heard of them. Wonder who those people are.

From Wikipedia:
TheInstitute for Humane Studies (IHS) is a that offers educational and career programs...
...
The institute is governed by a board of directors, currently chaired by Charles G. Koch.


Thanks for your "contribution" I guess.
 
2013-04-24 11:58:31 AM  

un4gvn666: From Wikipedia:



Preview is your friend.

The  Institute for Humane Studies (IHS) is a libertarian non-profit organization that offers educational and career programs.
 
2013-04-24 12:05:19 PM  
Not to mention their ideas are thoroughly refuted by Elizabeth Warren's book The Two-income Trap where she uses actual and incredibly detailed data to draw her conclusions.
 
2013-04-24 12:05:40 PM  
I've heard economists on NPR say that this is a normal state of affairs in a healthy capitalist system.  Is that true?  To what extent?  I'm far from an expert on economics.  Can one of you smart farkers help me out?  The tubes aren't giving me straight answers.
 
2013-04-24 12:11:32 PM  

UseUrHeadFred: I've heard economists on NPR say that this is a normal state of affairs in a healthy capitalist system.


NPR likes to have asshat economists who smell their own shiat as a way of making predictions come on air and spew verbal diarrhea in a sad attempt to be "non-partisan".

Next time, google the name of the economist. You're sure to find some shiat you wouldn't believe was published by an educated person.
 
2013-04-24 12:18:29 PM  

un4gvn666: NPR likes to have asshat economists who smell their own shiat as a way of making predictions come on air and spew verbal diarrhea in a sad attempt to be "non-partisan".

Next time, google the name of the economist. You're sure to find some shiat you wouldn't believe was published by an educated person.


It's probably their way of staying "balanced" in the tardy tard world. A Paul Krugman article ran in the local paper here in rural SC, and the OP section for the last week has been full of hicks spouting homebrewed wisdom about how Krugman is a liar who has never worked a day in his life and if he'd ever had to run a small business he'd know that debt was bad. These people think "Nobel Prize" is given out for being the libbiest lib.
 
2013-04-24 12:21:27 PM  

Sergeant Grumbles: un4gvn666: NPR likes to have asshat economists who smell their own shiat as a way of making predictions come on air and spew verbal diarrhea in a sad attempt to be "non-partisan".

Next time, google the name of the economist. You're sure to find some shiat you wouldn't believe was published by an educated person.

It's probably their way of staying "balanced" in the tardy tard world. A Paul Krugman article ran in the local paper here in rural SC, and the OP section for the last week has been full of hicks spouting homebrewed wisdom about how Krugman is a liar who has never worked a day in his life and if he'd ever had to run a small business he'd know that debt was bad. These people think "Nobel Prize" is given out for being the libbiest lib.


Part of the reason I don't listen much anymore (other part is Rachel Maddow dominates my car on my morning/afternoon drives). Too many blatant attempts to appear neutral by having certified asshats spouting bullshiat on air with no rebuttals or corrections of any kind.
 
2013-04-24 12:58:29 PM  
img2-1.timeinc.net

Not shocked in the slightest.

KABOOM! KABOOM!
 
2013-04-24 01:10:34 PM  
When the federal reserve engages in monitary inflation, the increase amount of money does not immediately go into the accounts of every american.

Thus the people who are first to receive the new money (huge banks/investors) benefit at the expense of the people who it 'gets' to later (average joe) , and even more those who are on fixed incomes (poor/elderly)

Thus the rich get richer, the poor get poorer.

cdn.theatlantic.com
theeconomiccollapseblog.com


Weird, once the money supply started taking off, so did the 1%... and when it began to slow, so did the 1%, and when it reaccelerated, so did the 1%
 
2013-04-24 01:10:39 PM  

UseUrHeadFred: I've heard economists on NPR say that this is a normal state of affairs in a healthy capitalist system.  Is that true?  To what extent?  I'm far from an expert on economics.  Can one of you smart farkers help me out?  The tubes aren't giving me straight answers.


Anyone who says they know for sure what a "normal, healthy capitalist system is", is full of shiat.  Nobody knows really, all we have are various theories backed up by economic models and historical examples.
 
2013-04-24 01:10:58 PM  
Given an economic recovery with falling housing prices this is what you would expect. Most people have 50% or more of their wealth in their home, those who don't are already rich.
 
2013-04-24 01:13:44 PM  

You're the jerk... jerk: Given an economic recovery with falling housing prices this is what you would expect. Most people have 50% or more of their wealth in their home, those who don't are already rich.


House prices have been stable or increasing on average for a while now.  Plus most of the people on the bottom do not own a home.
 
2013-04-24 01:28:26 PM  

nocturnal001: You're the jerk... jerk: Given an economic recovery with falling housing prices this is what you would expect. Most people have 50% or more of their wealth in their home, those who don't are already rich.

House prices have been stable or increasing on average for a while now.  Plus most of the people on the bottom do not own a home.


The data is from 2009-2011, when home prices were still falling.

Home ownership rates are about 65-70%. Those who do not own a home have close to zero wealth, and thus would not have gotten poorer.

Also, the article outlines where the bottom 93% (strange cutoff) lost wealth, and it was mainly in home/auto value.
 
2013-04-24 01:36:08 PM  

AngryDragon: The Stealth Hippopotamus: Just throw down some parks and everyone will be happy.

Panem et Circenses.

As long as the underclass has the latest shiny thing in their hands, American Idol on TV, and some stupid sporting event they can attend to distract them, things are working precisely as planned.  Let's also keep at each other's throats about abortion, gay marriage, drugs, and the separation of church and state.  Those things will make our lives of indentured servitude much more bearable.

We (Americans) are officially idiots.


Best argument for the legalization of marijuana. Just give them that small win, and they will soma their indentured life away.
 
2013-04-24 01:38:50 PM  

sure haven't: Capitalism is a linear system, and we're seeing the end of it. Once you "win" there is nowhere else to go.


We're not really even capitalist.  In capitalism large companies are allowed to fail and new technology tends to upend the system every now and then.  The system we have now is way too protectionist to allow either of those things to happen.
 
2013-04-24 01:38:58 PM  

You're the jerk... jerk: nocturnal001: You're the jerk... jerk: Given an economic recovery with falling housing prices this is what you would expect. Most people have 50% or more of their wealth in their home, those who don't are already rich.

House prices have been stable or increasing on average for a while now.  Plus most of the people on the bottom do not own a home.

The data is from 2009-2011, when home prices were still falling.

Home ownership rates are about 65-70%. Those who do not own a home have close to zero wealth, and thus would not have gotten poorer.

Also, the article outlines where the bottom 93% (strange cutoff) lost wealth, and it was mainly in home/auto value.


Ehh, I was conflating income with wealth. My mistake as the article does concern itself with wealth.

This isn't that crazy then under this sort of recovery, but it is part of a trend that goes far beyond the housing crash.
 
2013-04-24 01:41:42 PM  

Tommy Moo: Well, yes, that is what happens when the DJIA and S&P gain 50% in four years. Poor people don't own much in stock. If it makes you feel better, the wealthy lost all of the volatile wealth before gaining it back.


This exactly. One wonders whether the authors of the study cherry picked the period to support a predetermined thesis.

Stock prices went up from 2009 to 2011, house prices continued to decline. That is going to make those with a greater portion of their wealth in stock (by definition, the rich) appear to do better than those whose primary asset is their home.
 
2013-04-24 01:44:38 PM  

sure haven't: Capitalism is a linear system, and we're seeing the end of it. Once you "win" there is nowhere else to go.
But whattaya gonna do? The game is rigged against anyone not born into it. You simply cannot reach high places (unless you win the lottery, and I'm including becoming a movie star, etc, in the lottery category, because it's all luck).

Thank God I live in Canada, where it's *EGADS* more SOCIALIST than America. It's so scary when you read into the income disparity that has happened, and will continue to get worse... because things are moving as they were designed to. The system is working, it's working perfectly. It's just not working in the sense that people think about when they bring to mind a "free country".

Well it'll at least be interesting to see what happens. When it truly is the end-game, bad things are going to take place. History teaches us again and again you can only keep the populace down for so long. Rinse and repeat, etc.


If the Cheeto supplies ever run out, the neo-communist revolutionaries might leave their mothers' basements and cause trouble. Until then don't worry.
 
2013-04-24 02:25:19 PM  
When Republicans rattle on about "capitalism," I mentally substitute the word "feudalism." It tends to make more sense.
 
2013-04-24 02:51:43 PM  

un4gvn666: UseUrHeadFred: I've heard economists on NPR say that this is a normal state of affairs in a healthy capitalist system.

NPR likes to have asshat economists who smell their own shiat as a way of making predictions come on air and spew verbal diarrhea in a sad attempt to be "non-partisan".

Next time, google the name of the economist. You're sure to find some shiat you wouldn't believe was published by an educated person.


This is not a knock on NPR (in general).  I listen to it enough to know the economists they put on are asshats.  I suspect this is due to a difficulty in finding non-asshat-wearing economists.

Among of my favorite tips from NPR is the advice given in the early 2000s: if you get a credit card offer with an extra-low or 0% introductory rate, max out the card and put it all in the stock market.  When the intro rate expires, sell the stock and pocket the profit.  It's free money!

Of course a plan like that can't fail unless one of two things happens.  One, you have an emergency when you need access to those funds you've tied up in stock.  Or two, stock prices go down.  While neither of those things happens in the world of economics, they are quite common in the world the rest of us inhabit.

A more recent example from last year had an economist convinced government debt is not an issue, should not be a factor in elections, not worth mentioning in the news.  After all, as long as the economy is growing and wages are rising, we're borrowing "expensive" money today, and paying it back with "cheap" money in the future.  That future money comes from the payback of investments made today, or in the costs savings from things like infrastructure improvements, and the like.  It's free money!

Of course here in the real world, the economy isn't growing.  For anyone outside of the top 5%, real wages haven't gone up in 30 years.  Oh, and rather than borrowing to make investments for the future, we're borrowing so that pallets of cash can be flown to the Middle East.  There will be no payback in the future.

I know government debt  isn't the same as individual debt, but economists for a long time have been saying government debt isn't an issue because of A, B, and C, but never follow up with what happens when you have the debt, but A, B, and C are no longer true.

And anyway, everything that needed to be said on the subject was covered by Sybarite.
 
2013-04-24 03:18:37 PM  

RumsfeldsReplacement: Poor people buy shiat they don't need.

Rich people make the shiat that poor people buy.

Outrage?


Say what now?
 
2013-04-24 03:28:42 PM  

mcmnky: un4gvn666: UseUrHeadFred: I've heard economists on NPR say that this is a normal state of affairs in a healthy capitalist system.

NPR likes to have asshat economists who smell their own shiat as a way of making predictions come on air and spew verbal diarrhea in a sad attempt to be "non-partisan".

Next time, google the name of the economist. You're sure to find some shiat you wouldn't believe was published by an educated person.

This is not a knock on NPR (in general).  I listen to it enough to know the economists they put on are asshats.  I suspect this is due to a difficulty in finding non-asshat-wearing economists.

Among of my favorite tips from NPR is the advice given in the early 2000s: if you get a credit card offer with an extra-low or 0% introductory rate, max out the card and put it all in the stock market.  When the intro rate expires, sell the stock and pocket the profit.  It's free money!


This isn't exclusive to NPR.  Economics wants to be a science, but economists are more akin to sportswriters than physicists.

Whenever you hear someone say "Economists agree..." you can ignore whatever comes after that.  Economists never agree.
 
2013-04-24 03:46:28 PM  

Debeo Summa Credo: This exactly. One wonders whether the authors of the study cherry picked the period to support a predetermined thesis.

Stock prices went up from 2009 to 2011, house prices continued to decline. That is going to make those with a greater portion of their wealth in stock (by definition, the rich) appear to do better than those whose primary asset is their home.


Housing prices don't effect "income" much. Wealth, sure, but not income.
 
2013-04-24 03:47:58 PM  

MugzyBrown: Weird, once the money supply started taking off, so did the 1%... and when it began to slow, so did the 1%, and when it reaccelerated, so did the 1%


Monetary base in not the "money supply."

M2 is a better measurement of money supply.

research.stlouisfed.org
 
2013-04-24 04:25:45 PM  

sure haven't: Capitalism is a linear system, and we're seeing the end of it. Once you "win" there is nowhere else to go.
But whattaya gonna do? The game is rigged against anyone not born into it. You simply cannot reach high places (unless you win the lottery, and I'm including becoming a movie star, etc, in the lottery category, because it's all luck).

Thank God I live in Canada, where it's *EGADS* more SOCIALIST than America. It's so scary when you read into the income disparity that has happened, and will continue to get worse... because things are moving as they were designed to. The system is working, it's working perfectly. It's just not working in the sense that people think about when they bring to mind a "free country".

Well it'll at least be interesting to see what happens. When it truly is the end-game, bad things are going to take place. History teaches us again and again you can only keep the populace down for so long. Rinse and repeat, etc.




Are you suggesting the US needs to add more high end content for max level players?
 
2013-04-24 04:44:08 PM  

UseUrHeadFred: I've heard economists on NPR say that this is a normal state of affairs in a healthy capitalist system.  Is that true?  To what extent?  I'm far from an expert on economics.  Can one of you smart farkers help me out?  The tubes aren't giving me straight answers.


As just a capitalist system? Oh hell, yeah, it's healthy as all getout. Plenty of capitalizing going on.

Our *free market* capitalist system (which is what people are in fact referring to when they say "capitalism"), OTOH, is completely borked.  Sellers of labor have lost equal bargaining power with buyers (e.g. destroying labor unions), Big Players keep new players out of markets and make extranormal profits by relying on barriers to entry (e.g. absurdly-long/sweeping patents, or massive capital costs to enter a market). Pertinent information isn't readily available (e.g. is traded upon, or is hidden under the guise of personal rights [how corporations hijacked the 14th amendment]).  I could go on but I'd rather not have an aneurysm today.
 
2013-04-24 05:39:19 PM  
AngryDragon:

Panem et Circenses.

I make every effort to learn something new every day. You were the teacher today.

Thank you.
 
2013-04-24 06:08:03 PM  

impaler: Debeo Summa Credo: This exactly. One wonders whether the authors of the study cherry picked the period to support a predetermined thesis.

Stock prices went up from 2009 to 2011, house prices continued to decline. That is going to make those with a greater portion of their wealth in stock (by definition, the rich) appear to do better than those whose primary asset is their home.

Housing prices don't effect "income" much. Wealth, sure, but not income.


Yeah, and TFA is about wealth, not income.
 
Displayed 50 of 68 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter








In Other Media
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report