U.S. Poverty Rate, 1 in 6, at Highest Level in Years

[ChriswUfGator]

I tend to doubt you have any statistics to support that assumption. And there were other guys also all over the news saying they were protesting because of police brutality, lack of freedom of speech, unemployment, rampant government corruption, etc. It's not as black and white as you're making it.

Who's talking statistics?

I'm sure you saw all the same news interviews as I did, with the rebels running around with guns describing why they were fighting, and wealth disparities and poverty topped the list every time. Are you saying the rebels lied about why they revolted against their own government? I mean, let's remember everything we learned in college here. We're talking primary sources vs. secondary sources. You have a host of direct primary sources, and you're saying it's invalid because there is not (yet) any secondary source? That's kind of ridiculous, really. Someone tells you why they did what they did, and you're going to wait for some other random person to put it in graph format before you'll accept it?

Whatever you say, Chris.

It's not what I said, it's what the people fighting the revolution which we were debating said. So my apologies if their stated reasons don't fit your foregone conclusion. Maybe you should fly over to tell them they're all wrong about things?

[Lunican]

Middle class income fell 7% in the last 10 years, to $49,445, a level not seen since 1996.



NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- It's official. The first decade of the 21st century will go down in the history books as a step back for the American middle class.

Last week, the government made gloomy headlines when it released the latest census report showing the poverty rate rose to a 17-year high. A whopping 46.2 million people (or 15.1% of the U.S. population) live in poverty and 49.9 million live without health insurance.

But the data also gave the first glimpse of what happened to middle-class incomes in the first decade of the millennium. While the earnings of middle-income Americans have barely budged since the mid 1970s, the new data showed that from 2000 to 2010, they actually regressed.
For American households in the middle of the pay scale, income fell to $49,445 last year, when adjusted for inflation, a level not seen since 1996.

And over the 10-year period, their income is down 7%.
"Economists talk about the lost decade in Japan. Well, with these 2010 data, we can confirm the lost decade for the American middle class," said Jared Bernstein, senior fellow at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.

http://money.cnn.com/2011/09/21/news/economy/middle_class_income/index.htm

[FayeforCure]

The Moral Question

Posted: 9/30/11 09:16 AM ET

We dodged another shut-down bullet, but only until November 18. That's when the next temporary bill to keep the government going runs out. House Republicans want more budget cuts as their price for another stopgap spending bill.

Among other items, Republicans are demanding major cuts in a nutrition program for low-income women and children. The appropriation bill the House passed June 16 would deny benefits to more than 700,000 eligible low-income women and young children next year.

What kind of country are we living in?

More than one in three families with young children is now living in poverty (37 percent, to be exact) according to a recent analysis of Census data by Northeastern University's Center for Labor Market Studies. That's the highest percent on record. The Agriculture Department says nearly one in four young children (23.6) lives in a family that had difficulty affording sufficient food at some point last year.

We're in the worst economy since the Great Depression -- with lower-income families and kids are bearing the worst of it -- and what are Republicans doing? Cutting programs Americans desperately need to get through it.

Medicaid is also under assault. Congressional Republicans want to reduce the federal contribution to Medicaid by $771 billion over next decade and shift more costs to states and low-income Americans.

It gets worse. Most federal programs to help children and lower-income families are in the so-called "non-defense discretionary" category of the federal budget. The congressional super-committee charged with coming up with $1.5 trillion of cuts eight weeks from now will almost certainly take a big whack at this category because it's the easiest to cut. Unlike entitlements, these programs depend on yearly appropriations.

Even if the super-committee doesn't agree (or even if they do, and Congress doesn't approve of their proposal) an automatic trigger will make huge cuts in domestic discretionary spending.

It gets even worse. Drastic cuts are already underway at the state and local levels. Since the fiscal year began in July, states no longer receive about $150 billion in federal stimulus money -- money that was used to fill gaps in state budgets over the last two years.

The result is a downward cascade of budget cuts -- from the federal government to state governments and then to local governments -- that are hurting most Americans but kids and lower-income families in particular.

So far this year, 23 states have reduced education spending. According to a survey of city finance officers released Tuesday by the National League of Cities, half of all American cities face cuts in state aid for education.

As housing values plummet, local property tax receipts are down. That means even less money for schools and local family services. So kids are getting larger class sizes, reduced school hours, shorter school weeks, cuts in pre-Kindergarten programs (Texas has eliminated pre-Kindergarten for 100,000 children), even charges for textbooks and extra-curricular activities.

Meanwhile the size of America's school-age population keeps growing notwithstanding. Between now and 2015, an additional 2 million kids are expected to show up in our schools.

Local family services are being cut or terminated. Tens of thousands of social workers have been laid off. Cities and counties are reducing or eliminating their contributions to Head Start, which provides early childhood education to the children of low-income parents.

All this would be bad enough if the economy were functioning normally. For these cuts to happen now is morally indefensible.

Yet Republicans won't consider increasing taxes on the rich to pay for what's needed -- even though the wealthiest members of our society are richer than ever, taking home a bigger slice of total income and wealth than in seventy-five years, and paying the lowest tax rates in three decades.

The president's modest proposals to raise taxes on the rich -- limiting their tax deductions, ending the Bush tax cut for incomes over $250,000, and making sure the rich pay at the same rate as average Americans - don't come close to paying for what American families need.

Marginal tax rates should be raised at the top, and more tax brackets should be added for incomes over $500,000, over $1,500,000, over $5 million. The capital gains tax should be as high as that on ordinary income.

Wealth over $7.2 million should be subject to a 2 percent surtax. After all, the top one half of 1 percent now owns over 28 percent of the nation's total wealth. Such a tax on them would yield $70 billion a year. According to an analysis by Yale's Bruce Ackerman and Anne Alstott, that would generate at least half of $1.5 trillion deficit-reduction target over ten years set for the super committee.

Another way to raise money would be through a tiny tax (one-half of one percent) tax on financial transactions. This would generate $200 billion a year, and hardly disturb Wall Street's casino at all. (The European Commission is about to unveil such a tax there.)

All this can be done, but only if Americans understand what's really at stake here.

When Republicans recently charged the president with promoting "class warfare," he answered it was "just math." But it's more than math. It's a matter of morality.

Republicans have posed the deepest moral question of any society: whether we're all in it together. Their answer is we're not.

President Obama should proclaim, loudly and clearly, we are.


Robert Reich is the author of Aftershock: The Next Economy and America's Future, now in bookstores. This post originally appeared at RobertReich.org.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-reich/repbulicans-stop-gap-budget-cuts-_b_988640.html

[FayeforCure]

Say what you want.  IMO, it's not the disparity, it's the living conditions of the un-wealthy.  We provide assistance because their own gov'ts won't. 

Here is a different situation (today).  There may be a huge disparity between the top 5% and the bottom 30%, but the bottom 30 don't have it nearly as bad as the bottom 60% in other countries.

I guess the point I'm trying to make is collectively, it doesn't matter if the top 5% control 90% of the wealth in this country, it doesn't matter as long as 80% of  the bottom 30% still have cable television, a car and disposable income.

It's not the point I'm making, it's that these guys were all over CNN talking about how the wealth gap and impoverished living conditions in Egypt caused the revolution. You know, I guess at some point NRW, the proletariat needs to be able to buy that T.V. or whatever have you, when they want it. Life's short, and if most of your population spends it toiling away to enrich a select few people without adequate renumeration, then you're going to have trouble maintaining an orderly society.

Whether you want to maintain an orderly society is really the question. This orgasmic vision the Republicans and Libertarians have of everyone living in a slum fending for themselves, generally except (naturally) for them, won't actually come to pass. It never does. The result is normally revolution. This doesn't work out, you know. Money instantly becomes meaningless when a majority of the country no longer supports the government, I'd like to avoid that in this country, if it were up to me.

This is a greatly oversimplified explanation of the Egyptian revolution. Economic issues such as rampant unemployment and inflation affected more than just the poor and were only one of the various factors at stake. The autocratic rule of Hosni Mubarak, the lack of free speech and democratic process, and governmental corruption and brutality was equally important. Egypt's situation isn't really a good comparison to the US.

It's not oversimplified, each of those factors is at play in the US, and that's exactly why I made the comparison.

We haven't reached the level Egypt had arrived at (yet), but that's unarguably the direction in which we're headed.

Yup Chris, and our response is already being compared to what went on in Cairo and Athens!

Occupy Wall Street protesters driven by varying goals
Almost two weeks into an anti-greed sit-in, the 'leaderless resistance movement' is at a crossroads.

Day 13 of Occupy Wall Street begins with a march through the streets of Lower Manhattan around the time the opening bell rings on the stock exchange. (Carolyn Cole, Los Angeles Times / September 30, 2011)


Women on Wall Street: Small group at the top gets smaller


By Tina Susman, Los Angeles Times

September 29, 2011, 5:48 p.m.
Reporting from New Yorkâ€" Michael Moore and Susan Sarandon have dropped in. A seasoned diplomat dispenses free advice. Supporters send everything from boxes of food and clothes to Whole Foods gift cards. They even have their own app, for the legions of fans following them on iPhones and Androids.

Nearly two weeks into a sit-in at a park in Manhattan's financial district, the "leaderless resistance movement" calling itself Occupy Wall Street is at a crossroads. The number of protesters on scene so far tops out at a few hundred, tiny by Athens or Cairo standards. But the traction they have gained from run-ins with police, a live feed from their encampment and celebrity visits is upping expectations. How about some specific demands, a long-term strategy, maybe even … office space?

So far the group, which generally defines itself as anti-greed, has none of those.

"At a certain point, there's a valid criticism in people asking, 'What are you doing here?'" protester Chris Biemer, 23, said on Wednesday, Day 11 of the demonstration. In an exchange that illuminated one of the dilemmas that any movement for change faces in trying to sustain momentum, Biemer and protester Victoria Sobel made it clear they had different visions for Occupy Wall Street.

Biemer, who recently moved to New York from Florida with a degree in business administration, says that ideally the group should team up with a nonprofit organization and get office space.

"It's possible to stay here for months or longer, but at some point we're going to become a fixture," he said of their home in Zuccotti Park, a privately owned, publicly accessible plaza dotted with trees and flower beds about midway between the Stock Exchange and the former World Trade Center site.

Sobel, who like Biemer serves on Occupy Wall Street's finance committee, disagrees and said the group's strength lies in its ability to remain highly visible and in a place where anyone can visit and participate. The 21-year-old New York University student happily reported Wednesday that bookshelves had been delivered to the UPS store where the group receives mail. They'll sit beneath a tarp in the park, all part of Sobel's vision to solidify the group's foothold.

"It's a moment of clarifying for us," Sobel said, confident that as autumn's chill turns to winter's subfreezing temperatures, Occupy Wall Street will stay put. "We'll layer," she said with a laugh, when asked how they'll manage the cold.

The protest, which evolved from a network of individuals and groups galvanized by the demonstrations in Egypt last winter, has moved far beyond what it was on Sept. 17, when police barricaded the streets outside the Stock Exchange to prevent a march there to protest corporate greed.

A map in Zuccotti Park pinpoints scores of other cities with Occupy Wall Street events either underway or planned, including sit-ins planned for Los Angeles on Saturday and Washington on Oct. 6.

But its proximity to the real Wall Street and its series of high-profile visitors have made the New York protest the focal point. So have inflammatory videos posted online that show a New York police officer using pepper spray on some protesters last Saturday.

Now, its settlement has gelled into an organized community that hums along almost Zen-like, coexisting with the city that rages around it and ignored by many either too busy or too uninterested to stop. Harried commuters seem to barely notice the mishmash of humanity a few feet away as they rush down the sidewalks skirting the park.

Tourists stroll in to snap pictures and read the protest signs scattered across the ground, then wander off to their next sightseeing stop. Executives drop in on lunch breaks to talk politics and economics. Police hang back on the sidewalks, and follow along when groups of protesters stage marches.

Protest numbers vary as people drift in and out of the park. Some live in the area and come by for a few hours each day or week. Others stay there around the clock, their sleeping bags, guitars and clothing bundles spread on the ground. On Wednesday, they included a sleepy-eyed young man in a rumpled T-shirt cuddling a pet rat, and a woman who pranced about in her underwear.

There are committees, including one for finance, food and comfort, which ensures that anyone who needs blankets, dry clothing or perhaps a hug gets it. There are twice-daily meetings called general assemblies, where anyone can make a brief announcement. The assemblies draw everyone together in a tight huddle. To avoid violating a ban on bullhorns, the crowd obediently repeats in unison every phrase uttered by the main speaker, to ensure everyone hears.

Each morning, protesters stage a "morning bell march" through the neighborhood, to coincide with the clanging at 9:30 a.m. of the bell that marks the start of trading at the Stock Exchange. Most days, a "closing bell" march also takes place in the afternoon.

On its website, Occupy Wall Street describes itself as a "leaderless resistance movement" drawn from people of all backgrounds and political persuasions.

"The one thing we all have in common is that we are the 99 percent that will no longer tolerate the greed and corruption of the 1 percent," the website says. The posters in Zuccotti Park speak to the lack of a narrow platform: "End financial aid to Israel"; "End greed, end poverty, end war"; "No death penalty"; "Tired of racism."

Some supporters of the premise wonder how far Occupy Wall Street can go in galvanizing others if it does not translate its anger into specific demands.

"I see something beautiful here. I've never had a more interesting political debate," said Carne Ross, a former British diplomat who resigned in protest over the invasion of Iraq, and who now owns a consulting business in New York. But Ross, who stops by regularly to advise Occupy Wall Street, said it needs "far broader outreach" and a narrower message.

"They need to get a message to people who can't be here," Ross said.

"I'd prefer to see a list of demands," one fan wrote on the Occupation Wall Street Facebook page, echoing the concerns of a woman who tweeted something similar to Moore as he did his MSNBC interview. She asked for "some specific, tangible goals."

Michael T. Heaney, a University of Michigan political science professor who has studied social protest movements, said such groups often bump up against pressure to become more focused and to either build or join institutions that can support them.

"What you're talking about is a degree of buying into a political system," Heaney said. "But the more you use tactics that we recognize as getting you influence, the more you buy into the system, and the more you buy into the system, the more you open yourself up to compromise."

In Occupy Wall Street's case, Heaney said demands could be as vague as simply calling for financial bailout programs to apply to individuals rather than banks.

Most of those in Zuccotti Park, though, don't see the need for a change in tactics. At least not yet.

"There isn't a consolidated message, and I don't think there needs to be," said Andrew Lynn, 34, who drove the three hours from his home in Troy, N.Y., to help the demonstrators' media team.

On Wednesday, he hunched over a laptop sheltered from the clammy air by an umbrella. A generator rumbled beside him, ensuring the group's activities continued to stream live to audiences.

Added Kobi Skolnick, a young Israeli American who by Wednesday was in his ninth day of participating in the protest: "I think the main thing we're doing is knocking on the walls of ignorance in this country so people wake up."

tina.susman@latimes.com

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-wall-street-protest-20110930,0,6859500.story

[FayeforCure]

Patriotic Millionaires Echo Occupy Wall Street


First Posted: 10/3/11 08:55 PM ET   Updated: 10/3/11 09:23 PM ET

At last week's Occupy Wall Street San Francisco protest, demonstrators gathered in the Financial District chanting, "Why is life a bitch? 'Cause we don't tax the rich." And according to Bay Area-founded Patriotic Millionaires, many of the rich agree.

Now a national organization, the Patriotic Millionaires is a group of super wealthy individuals urging the government to increase taxes on those with incomes over $1 million -- the very tax group they represent. Members are largely made up of successful alumni from start-ups like Google, Esprit and Aardvark, and argue that if the 375,000 Americans with incomes over $1 million were taxed more aggressively, the nation could maintain the federally funded programs that helped make them rich in the first place. The group also encourages the expiration of the 2001 and 2003 Bush tax cuts for the wealthy -- cuts that, the group points out, were never meant to be permanent, and are crippling the economy.

(SCROLL DOWN FOR PHOTOS AND VIDEO)

"I'm a millionaire," said member Dal LaMang, co-managing partner at IceStone, in a video interview posted on the group's website. "My government gave me student loans and I got a great education. Then the small business administration lent money to my company which then made me millions." LaMang argues that without crucial government loans, his success would never have been possible.

Ron Garret, a software engineer turned angel investor agrees. "Millionaires are not the cause of a robust economy," he said in another video interview. "They are the result of a robust economy." Garret argues that cutting crucial social projects and public services will stifle opportunities to create companies like the start-up he helped grow: Google.

Of course, the "Millionaires" are not without their critics. One of the most vocal opponents has been Utah Senator Orrin Hatch. In a letter to the Millionaires, Hatch called the proposed tax increase "a fool's errand," claiming that the money gained would barely scratch the surface of the nation's $14 trillion debt crisis.

However, according to the group's website, allowing the scheduled tax cuts expire as planned would pay down the national debt by $700 billion. And while the figure is no solution, the Millionaires argue that it's certainly a start.

The Millionaires also argue that Hatch is missing the point.

"There are thousands and thousands and thousands of very well off people with very high incomes whose effective tax rate is substantially below the middle class, the lower middle class and lower wage earners," said Dennis Mehiel, Chairman of US Corrugated Inc. "There's a fundamental inequity and it contradicts the progressive nature of our internal revenue code and our tax policies over generations in this country." For Mehiel, the proposed plan is as much about creating a level playing field as it is about alleviating debt.

Mehiel's argument is especially sensitive this week, as it echoes those on the signs marching down California street in San Francisco -- and the ones in New York, and in Boston, and in Los Angeles...


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/10/03/patriotic-millionaires-occupy-wall-street_n_993360.html

[BridgeTroll]

Even if you could convince me that this would make much of a difference... the article denotes "rich" as 1 million in income... pretty sure the Obama gang defines it as 250k. 

You guys talk about the the taxes of the "super rich"... but the target is clearly on the large number of folks beginning at 250k... they certainly do not qualify to join the "Patriotic Millionaires" club...

[FayeforCure]

Even if you could convince me that this would make much of a difference... the article denotes "rich" as 1 million in income... pretty sure the Obama gang defines it as 250k. 

You guys talk about the the taxes of the "super rich"... but the target is clearly on the large number of folks beginning at 250k... they certainly do not qualify to join the "Patriotic Millionaires" club...

BT, the "rich" are quite uniformly denoted as 1 million in income.

What most folks want though is a roll back of the Bush tax cuts for incomes of $250 and uo, which unfortunately was implement right before we started waging two wars on the Nation's credit card.

Two different issues, that both need to be adressed.

Taxes are the price we pay to succeed in a civilized and stable nation. It is the patriotic duty of the rich to pay for the wars rather than put them on our nation's credit card.

The poor already pay for the war with their lives, as joining the military often seems like their only option of getting out of their misery of flipping burgers.

[BridgeTroll]

Hmmm... not sure about that.  There seems to be quite a few interchangeable and and moving targets of "rich".

Rich = 250k+
Super rich = 1 mill +
uber/ultra rich = 100 mill +

What if a millionaire no longer has income?

[FayeforCure]

Hmmm... not sure about that.  There seems to be quite a few interchangeable and and moving targets of "rich".

Rich = 250k+
Super rich = 1 mill +
uber/ultra rich = 100 mill +

What if a millionaire no longer has income?

So most people talk about the uber-rich not paying their share, and the over $250 folks needing their Bush tax cuts be rolled back. Two distinct groups.

The Bush tax cuts were supposed to be temporary, and the uber-rich need to start paying their share.

For every 3 jobs that produce something, there is one job that keeps the lid on, yet our security personel are under-paid.

You don't get to make or keep your wealth in an unstable society. Taxes are the price you pay for a civilized society that enables you to:

1. Make the wealth
2. Keep the wealth

Nobody ever makes their wealth in a vacuum.

[mtraininjax]

Complain, complain, complain.....you want to surpass the Republicans? Get your people educated to where they can stand on their own without having to rely on the Government. Can't keep running up debts with spend, spend, spend mentality, so get educated, get out and build a business and see what building something on your own can be like. Tax cuts are a drop in the bucket if just 5% of unemployed went back to school to get educated in some growth area of the economy. Kids stay in school, go to a college, get loans from Government for education, it is a great cycle and could be a great economy once again, but you have to get up off the coach and decide you WANT to do it.

[manasia]

Complain, complain, complain.....you want to surpass the Republicans? Get your people educated to where they can stand on their own without having to rely on the Government. Can't keep running up debts with spend, spend, spend mentality, so get educated, get out and build a business and see what building something on your own can be like. Tax cuts are a drop in the bucket if just 5% of unemployed went back to school to get educated in some growth area of the economy. Kids stay in school, go to a college, get loans from Government for education, it is a great cycle and could be a great economy once again, but you have to get up off the coach and decide you WANT to do it.

Mtrain are you sure mass numbers of people accumulation debt via student loans is a good cycle?

[mtraininjax]

Mtrain are you sure mass numbers of people accumulation debt via student loans is a good cycle?

Sure, why not? Education loans are different than property loans. If you default on your property loan, you lose your house, but if you default on an education loan, you still have the knowledge you gained and the degree to go with you through life.

Plus the government has more money available, easier to get to for student loans than property loans. I am a huge proponent for higher education, we need more people pushing the envelope in tech, medicine, our way of life, and you cannot do that while you are sitting on the sofa, watching Oprah reruns and happy you are on Medicare. Cause soon, your health will deteriorate, and we will all end up paying for bad health. It will break our country, if it continues.

[manasia]

Mtrain are you sure mass numbers of people accumulation debt via student loans is a good cycle?

Sure, why not? Education loans are different than property loans. If you default on your property loan, you lose your house, but if you default on an education loan, you still have the knowledge you gained and the degree to go with you through life.

Plus the government has more money available, easier to get to for student loans than property loans. I am a huge proponent for higher education, we need more people pushing the envelope in tech, medicine, our way of life, and you cannot do that while you are sitting on the sofa, watching Oprah reruns and happy you are on Medicare. Cause soon, your health will deteriorate, and we will all end up paying for bad health. It will break our country, if it continues.

From that perspective that debt makes more sense.

[mtraininjax]

From that perspective that debt makes more sense.

Manasia- I hate debt, but sometimes, you need to use the resources available to you to get a leg up on society. I'd much rather see National Debt created to re-invest in the people of the nation, because I know what we put into the debt, we will get back 100x greater in the output of the citizens who are educated.

[manasia]

From that perspective that debt makes more sense.

Manasia- I hate debt, but sometimes, you need to use the resources available to you to get a leg up on society. I'd much rather see National Debt created to re-invest in the people of the nation, because I know what we put into the debt, we will get back 100x greater in the output of the citizens who are educated.

That is not a bad idea.