SHOCKING: Wealth inequality in America

[2012JD]

You think?? It's because no-body wants to talk about them, they are a forgotten and ignored group of people. And yes, white people.

In the 60's JFK tried to help and established the President's Appalachian Regional Commission.

[Baluarte]

How's this shocking ?

In the US poverty basically means you have a home, two cars, a tv, a notebook, iPad , cable, a full fridge, nice clothes, iPhone & spending money.

I can't Count how many " poor " people have these things . Poverty in America doesn't really exist In that term

[Svipdag]

Why are the poor poor ? No other country offers more opportunities to better oneself than the United States. I hear poverty attributed to lack of opportunity. Opportunity knocks for him who has something to offer an employer. In every state of the Union free education is available to all and, indeed, is compulsory until age 16. Those who find no opportunity have not prepared themsleves to do anything to earn a living.

Vocational-technical schools are available at the public's expense to those who really want to better themselves. Evening sessions are available to those who work at something to keep body and soul together during the day. A recently deceased friend of mine taught in a vocational-technical school for over 20 years. Except in automoibile repair, enrollments were very poor. For those who displayed any aptitude for mathematics, surveying was available, a profession practised by two US presidents and always in demand. Locksmithing was also available, yet, despite an actual shortage of locksmiths, both of these courses were usually cancelled, not for lack of funding, but for LACK OF ENROLLMENT !

I conclude that the poor are poor not for lack of opportunity but for lack of willingness to avail themselves of opportunity. Our welfare system encourages idleness and rewards illegitimate fecundity, and thus perpetuates poverty.

"QVAE FVERVENT VITIA MORES SVNT" - LVCIVS ANNAEVS SENECA

[Baluarte]

I conclude that the poor are poor not for lack of opportunity but for lack of willingness to avail themselves of opportunity. Our welfare system encourages idleness and rewards illegitimate fecundity, and thus perpetuates poverty.

Thank you for explaining in this very well sourced statement why 50% of the population of the US has 7% of the whole national income. I suppose half of Americans have "no willingness to avail themselves of opportunity".

[Loki]

I conclude that the poor are poor not for lack of opportunity but for lack of willingness to avail themselves of opportunity. Our welfare system encourages idleness and rewards illegitimate fecundity, and thus perpetuates poverty.

What about children who were born into poverty?

[Baluarte]

So, who are the 1%? They're Jewish, no doubt about that. Rothschild family?

I'd like to see one of these for the UK as well, it'd be interesting to compare.

Read on societies like Skull and Bones or the Club Bilderberg. They are not all, but are a key part of the supranational apparatus that hoards wealth by exploiting humans. And yes, even if they're not all Jews, a sizable portion is.

[Herr Abubu]

What's not taken into account is that both the rich and the poor have been getting richer in the US. The richest have gotten a much larger share of the stick, but the stick has also grown so the share of the stick the poor have is longer than previously. Another thing it forgets is that the US, unlike f.e. Europe, has a system that doesn't benefit the richest but the fittest. The fittest either become rich, or, as the logical conclusion would be, the highest percentile inherit not only riches but genes as well. Determinism never was wrong. There is already a rather large disparity in the US in terms of natural predisposal to success because it's very diverse. The same is not true for Europe. The best possible answer to this is to study socioeconomic mobility in terms of intelligence and socioeconomic status. Is there any difference in socioeconomic mobility between intelligent and stupid poor people? That's one question that should be posed. If there is and it's in favour of intelligent people, then that explains a lot. One would have to conclude that aptitude is a contributing factor if it were the case. However, that's not to say there aren't other problems. Fraud and cronyism is part of an economic problem in the US, mostly because of the expansion of state. The recent bailouts of the corporations, which benefited none other than the corporations themselves, while leaving the rest with a heavier burden, including the state, though the burden of the state is really just the burden of the many. This is also part of the ineffectivity of the current system, which owes to faulty ideas and expansion of government. It's outdated too. (It would be outdated by about two-hundred and fifty-three to one-hundred and ninety-three years I'd say.) Just imagine a limp Keynes on metamphetamines.

Actually socialism(or socialist principles) is one of the main reasons for the increasing gap.

Increase in Social welfare and other government aid programs over the past decades have increased the gap significantly and stats prove this. It has made the poor worst off and it has created more poverty.

True free market principles is the only solution.

Indeed, welfare programs basically subsidize poverty rather than alleviate and/or abolish it. Handouts simply turn people lethargic and work skill programs aren't What's more is that it makes people dependent on the state. That has a lot of negative effects, especially in a democracy. It means that the politicians and parties for such programs can essentially buy votes through tax money, because those who benefit from it -- e.g. beneficiaries of said programs and public sector workers -- also become dependent on it and will thus vote for them. Interest groups, workers unions, play a big part in that today as we speak. Government intervention in general is the single most contributing factor to cronyism and corporationism in the US, which is one of the real problems. The system is in an evil circle, a bubble, which will burst sooner or later, and those who should be held accountable will not be held accountable.

"The 1% is 99% Jewish."

A sign I saw at an Occupy protest.

In the US it wouldn't surprise me. Elsewhere,I doubt it. Jews do make up a large percentage of the upper class in the US, disproportionate to their percentage of the population, that's for sure. But not 99% of it. 30-40% tops. But they're 2% of the US population.

Are you saying 49.5% of all the Jews in the US are part of the 1%? First you say it wouldn't surprise you, then you say they're 30-40% at most. Inconsistency of opinion? The Jews are disproportionally more well of however, and that's simply because they're also disproportionally more intelligent than the average as a group, not to speak of certain segments of the population below the average in terms of intelligence. The disproportionate amount of Jews in the higher echolons of society seems to correlate strongly with the disproportionate amount of Jews that have made some sort of intellectual contribution. If 49.5% of the Jews were indeed part of the 1% then that only speaks volumes for their capacity. It's quite admirable, really.

[Loki]

Another thing it forgets is that the US, unlike f.e. Europe, has a system that doesn't benefit the richest but the fittest.

That 1% must be very fit ... maybe IQ 160+ all of them

[Pontios]

This reminds me of the French revolution a bit. Everyone was poor and starving while the aristocrats and monarchs were rich, then heads started flying...

[Herr Abubu]

That 1% must be very fit ... maybe IQ 160+ all of them

Not necessarily by that much, but quite above average for sure. People like that tend to have better things to do than to get filthy rich to begin with too. I bet a large sum of philosophers, scientists, academics, etc., who I personally think far more highly of than the rich in terms of intelligence, just have better things to do than to get very rich. But I can tell you that Warren Buffet or Bill Gates aren't stupid. Goals and motivation are other factors that should be considered. In fact, when we get above an IQ of 120+, effort determines success more than IQ. 120+ seems a fair assumption for the 1%. Superior intelligence in any case.