Do Conservatives know that America ranks 23rd in the World for Infrastructure?

[Lunican]

In order for that graph to show that the rich are unfairly taxed over the poor, it needs to compare the percentage earned vs the percentage paid in taxes.

[pwhitford]

Sounds like they are paying in proportion to their wealth:

March 7th, 2011 7:35 PM

The Forbes 400 vs. Everybody Else

According to the most recent information, the Forbes 400 now have a greater net worth than the bottom 50% of U.S. households combined.

In 2009, the total net worth of the Forbes 400 was $1.27 trillion.

The best information now available shows that in 2009 the bottom 60% (yes, now it's 60%, not 50%) of U.S. households owned only 2.3% of total U.S. wealth.

Total U.S. household net worth -- rich, middle class and poor combined -- at the time the Forbes list came out was $53.15 trillion. So the bottom 60% of households possessed just $1.22 trillion of that $53.15 trillion, less than the Forbes 400.

Thus the Forbes 400 unquestionably have more wealth than the bottom 50%.

By contrast, in 2007 the bottom 50% of U.S. households owned slightly more wealth than the Forbes 400; the economic meltdown has hurt the bottom more than the top. (And in fact, in 2010 the net worth of the Forbes 400 jumped to $1.37 trillion.)

And please note: the Forbes 400 alone do not make up the entire top 1%, let alone the top 5%.

SOURCES:

1. Total net worth of Forbes 400, 2009: Forbes

2. Total net worth of bottom 60% of U.S. households, 2009, by percent of total U.S. household net worth: Edward Wolff, "Recent Trends in Household Wealth in the United States: Rising Debt and the Middle-Class Squeezeâ€"an Update to 2007," p. 33 Edward Wolff, Professor of Economics at New York University, is the top academic expert on economic inequality in the U.S. He writes:

"A somewhat rough update, based on the change in housing and stock prices, shows a marked deterioration in middle-class wealth. According to my estimates, while mean wealth (in 2007 dollars) fell by 17.3 percent between 2007 and 2009 to $443,600, median wealth plunged by an astounding 36.1 percent to $65,400 (about the same level as in 1992!) ... Trends in inequality [from 2007 to mid-2009] ... show a fairly steep rise in wealth inequality ... The share of the top 1 percent advanced from 34.6 to 37.1 percent, that of the top 5 percent from 61.8 to 65 percent, and that of the top quintile from 85 to 87.7 percent, while that of the second quintile fell from 10.9 to 10 percent, that of the middle quintile from 4 to 3.1 percent, and that of the bottom two quintiles from 0.2 to -0.8 percent." (emphasis added)

Note: a "quintile" is 20% of U.S. households, so the middle and bottom two quintiles include 60% of U.S. households.

3. Total net worth of U.S. households, third quarter of 2009: Federal Reserve, p. 1

4. Total net worth of bottom 50% of U.S. households, 2007, by amount: Arthur B. Kennickell, Federal Reserve, "Ponds and Streams: Wealth and Income in the U.S., 1989 to 2007, p. 35

5. Total net worth of Forbes 400, 2007: Forbes

6. Total net worth of Forbes 400, 2010: Forbes

Article provided by michaelmoore.com, IMHO a source at least as credible as heritage.org.

[Clem1029]

In order for that graph to show that the rich are unfairly taxed over the poor, it needs to compare the percentage earned vs the percentage paid in taxes.

Nobody made any discussion of fairness. The point is simply, for one to say there is no "shared sacrifice" is not based in any resemblance of reality.

[Lunican]

The graph attempts to portray the top 10% as paying 61% more than their fair share. It is basically just a big fat lie.

[BridgeTroll]

While I do not think I really fit the very loose definitions of "conservative"...   I do not think the few of us who seem to have differing views than you really fit the definition of...

Someone who is at war with the poor, the minorities or gay people.

or

we have liars, budget busters and corrupt criminals

[Buckethead!]

I just wish there was a conservative intellectual around.  Someone who wasn't at war with the poor, the minorities or gay people.  That would be nice.

TADA!

[BridgeTroll]

is it really YOU???

[Buckethead!]

Ya. I came here to reseach a company called RAM construction, which I thought I had seen here, and read this thread.

Most posts are so wrought with silliness, I had to jump in. I'll address those one by one.

(much to do)

That, and I have a mancrush on stephen that won't go away.

FWIW: Scott is proving to be a shallow suit, but ending a bad HSR debacle is a good thing. (even if he's a retard)

BTW, how can I get back too my old account? When I left in a huff... (I admit it) I made it where I couldn't log back in in case I got weak. Forums are addictive, you know.

I visit another forum, but just too many conservatives/neocons/tea partiers forming one big circle jerk.

Much more fun to come here and interrupt the lib circle jerk!

[Buckethead!]

Part of the problem is that our regulatory system allows very little innovation.  We are penalized for trying new concepts and rewarded for sticking with the 'tried and true'.

Your last two sentences seem to say that the "fault" for this aging infrastructure should be lain at the feet of both conservatives and liberals... or more precisely ALL Americans. Hmmm....

Well, it would definitely be a major conservative problem, considering that conservatives do everything in their power to deny changes in our environment, whether it's climate change ( which they deny is accellerated and man-made) or the inevitability of oil shortages that would require us to move to alternatives sooner rather than later.

Besides we all know how conservatives hate taxes and spending, without which major improvements in infrastructure are simply impossible.

So YES, primarily it IS a conservative problem. What governors again, were the ones turning down the HRS monies? What........, they were all conservative?

How about Democratic governors, did any of them turn down HSR money ? No, none?

Well, we couldn't be more clear than that!!!!

Conservatives do not hate spending unless it is on America or Americans. Iraq infrastructure they like spending on it so much they will Knock it down just to spend on it again.

I think you're right here, Jeffrey. I'm sure I've defended Halaburton and the war in Iraq at some point in my e-life, but there is a reason they want to perpetuate spending on foreign soil. Easy profits and no bid contracts.

[Buckethead!]

More than 40% of those Americans born in the bottom quintile remain stuck there as adults.

Wow!

This is awesome news!

Nearly 60% of people born into poverty escape by adulthood!

Capitalism works!

[Buckethead!]

Sounds like they are paying in proportion to their wealth:

March 7th, 2011 7:35 PM

The Forbes 400 vs. Everybody Else

According to the most recent information, the Forbes 400 now have a greater net worth than the bottom 50% of U.S. households combined.

In 2009, the total net worth of the Forbes 400 was $1.27 trillion.

The best information now available shows that in 2009 the bottom 60% (yes, now it's 60%, not 50%) of U.S. households owned only 2.3% of total U.S. wealth.

Total U.S. household net worth -- rich, middle class and poor combined -- at the time the Forbes list came out was $53.15 trillion. So the bottom 60% of households possessed just $1.22 trillion of that $53.15 trillion, less than the Forbes 400.

Thus the Forbes 400 unquestionably have more wealth than the bottom 50%.

By contrast, in 2007 the bottom 50% of U.S. households owned slightly more wealth than the Forbes 400; the economic meltdown has hurt the bottom more than the top. (And in fact, in 2010 the net worth of the Forbes 400 jumped to $1.37 trillion.)

And please note: the Forbes 400 alone do not make up the entire top 1%, let alone the top 5%.

SOURCES:

1. Total net worth of Forbes 400, 2009: Forbes

2. Total net worth of bottom 60% of U.S. households, 2009, by percent of total U.S. household net worth: Edward Wolff, "Recent Trends in Household Wealth in the United States: Rising Debt and the Middle-Class Squeezeâ€"an Update to 2007," p. 33 Edward Wolff, Professor of Economics at New York University, is the top academic expert on economic inequality in the U.S. He writes:

"A somewhat rough update, based on the change in housing and stock prices, shows a marked deterioration in middle-class wealth. According to my estimates, while mean wealth (in 2007 dollars) fell by 17.3 percent between 2007 and 2009 to $443,600, median wealth plunged by an astounding 36.1 percent to $65,400 (about the same level as in 1992!) ... Trends in inequality [from 2007 to mid-2009] ... show a fairly steep rise in wealth inequality ... The share of the top 1 percent advanced from 34.6 to 37.1 percent, that of the top 5 percent from 61.8 to 65 percent, and that of the top quintile from 85 to 87.7 percent, while that of the second quintile fell from 10.9 to 10 percent, that of the middle quintile from 4 to 3.1 percent, and that of the bottom two quintiles from 0.2 to -0.8 percent." (emphasis added)

Note: a "quintile" is 20% of U.S. households, so the middle and bottom two quintiles include 60% of U.S. households.

3. Total net worth of U.S. households, third quarter of 2009: Federal Reserve, p. 1

4. Total net worth of bottom 50% of U.S. households, 2007, by amount: Arthur B. Kennickell, Federal Reserve, "Ponds and Streams: Wealth and Income in the U.S., 1989 to 2007, p. 35

5. Total net worth of Forbes 400, 2007: Forbes

6. Total net worth of Forbes 400, 2010: Forbes

Article provided by michaelmoore.com, IMHO a source at least as credible as heritage.org.

Owning wealth has nothing to do with the current federal tax structure.

Income is taxed.

A universal consumption tax could rectify that.

LOVE ME!

[Buckethead!]

In order for that graph to show that the rich are unfairly taxed over the poor, it needs to compare the percentage earned vs the percentage paid in taxes.

yeah.  especially considering that the top 10% own 93% of the wealth and income.  I think its probably a vivid illustration of how unfairly they are being undertaxed.

If they should be paying 93% of the taxes, why are they only paying 71%?

Everyone else is paying for that 22% undertaxation for them.

One would need to devise a wealth tax to "correct" this. The estate tax performed this function to a degree.

[FayeforCure]

More than 40% of those Americans born in the bottom quintile remain stuck there as adults.

Wow!

This is awesome news!

Nearly 60% of people born into poverty escape by adulthood!

Capitalism works!

Why is everyone so afraid american capitalism is under attack? European capitalistic societies, according to the economic mobility report, are doing a far better job at lifting the poor out of poverty.

Yet, this was supposedly the "land of opportunity." Apparently NOT.

This is the land of extremes..............the extremely poor, and the extremely rich, with the middle class being squeezed out.

[Buckethead!]

There is truth in some of what you type.

Also falsehood. "Fear that capitalism is under attack" is fair enough.

It has to do with wall street bankers being government and government being wall street bakers.

Capitalism is indeed under attack: from the inside.

A currently presiding Democrat President is complicit.

[Gators312]

From what I am reading here, all we need to do is vote straight Democrat and we eliminate all the liars, cheats, and budget busters from our government.

We would also eliminate a war on the poor too!  Awesome!

Once again I don't like either side, they are polarizing for a reason.  Until we eliminate DNC and RNC we are FU**ED!

Both sides lie, steal and cheat and hide behind their constituents who defend them because they have the right color and mascot.

I like the OP blaming the "Conservatives" for the failure of our school system.  For the most part it is a failure of parents being involved.  Rarely is there an instance where a parent is involved that they can not receive the help they need for their children.  

We have failing schools because the kids don't show up, or aren't prepared, or just don't care.  I damn sure wanted to skip as much school as I could, but I had parents following up on me not giving up no matter how hard I tried to flunk out.  After high school I finally figured it out, paid my way through FCCJ and then UNF.  

I don't understand the mindset that the government is smarter than we are and know what's best for the people, but too many people believe it.