Only nationalization or flat out communism can resolve this and not without blood, “Conscription” and the destruction of the very fabric of America -not gonna happen! like it or lump it! That’s the way it is! U.S.A. doomed by her own successes .
That’s absurd. This situation can be improved very easily. Simply increase taxes on wealthy people. That’s how we’ve always had it and it worked well. People were able to get very wealthy, good for them, and they would pay a lot of taxes when they did. It simply reduces their share of the net wealth a bit. CEO’s would make 250x the median salary instead of 300x. They’d be fine. And as we paid down the debt and the $350B interest costs dropped taxes could be lowered on the lower classes and maintained on the upper. These deficits began in the 80’s and have accelerated ever since we stopped taxing wealth. Simple fiscal conservatism demands that the bills of the United States have to be paid with taxes as we go along. Common sense demands that those who are most fortunate should pay the bulk of it. This would be obvious and easy to implement if the right wing weren’t filling people’s heads with misinformation and obstructing debate in Congress.
Yeah that’s a great plan! in fact why don’t we just ask the government to steal every hard working Americans possessions and then divide it evenly among everyone else.
A higher tax on the wealthiest, those job “creators,” forces them to either reinvest the money into their companies, which means more jobs, or lose it to the government where it is redistributed in public services, meaning more jobs (necessarily via more demand). Low taxes on the wealthy doesn’t create jobs, it only lines the pockets of people who already have money. You can’t stir demand in our economy by cutting taxes, only by getting more money to the greatest number of people, the 90% who have so little of it.
If the best way to do it is raising taxes on the wealthiest members of our society? Well, I for one would be glad to see O’Reily off the air.
As an Australian, this image has no impact on me. We’re very used to the idea of having fewer people in our continent than many large cities of the world.
The point isnt population distrubution it’s wealth distribution.
This picture actually pleases me, it is capitalism at its best, money should be able to buy anything if you legally earn it.
Capitalism at it’s best? You’re looking at an oligarchy, and the end result of unregulated capitalism. Generational wealth is not earned, it’s inherited.
Yeah, the issue is that ‘legally’ is a very easily manipulated thing for those in the upper 1%. Do you have enough money to lobby for tax reform and financial laws to be changed?
This represents everything wrong in America.. Not because 10% is ultra rich, but because many Americans want everything given to them. Those 10% are where they are because they bust their freaking butt working.
Everyone is told that if you work hard you can climb your way up the ladder and make more money. Your average person wants to believe this because they want to be in the upper echelon. The upper echelon want people to believe this because people like ^ support them.
If you want the truth, look at upward mobility. This shows how many people actually move from lower to higher payed incomes. The fact is, the rich stay rich and the poor stay poor. How hard you ‘bust your freaking butt’ off doesn’t matter as much as how rich your dad was.
At 22 I had 50K in student loans and >$100 in my checking account and was living in a real dump. Ten years later I have made it to the top 10%. My parents were never even in the top 50%. The system is not rigged. I simply put in the effort.
Look, I was able to do that too, but you’re just being a dick about it. I was able to do it because I’m smart, I had a modest but involved family and I stayed healthy. I bet you take those things for granted. Not everyone has the advantages you’ve had. Now that we’re doing alright, why shouldn’t we be more responsible for paying for things we need like roads, schools, police, fire, defense, regulators, whatever? Why shouldn’t people who’ve been really fortunate pay even more? Why would you want to make things harder on people who aren’t doing very well?
You say if….. I think this is a fair representation of what it looks like. Not the exact boundries, but most of the land is owned by the top 10%. Almost 40% of people rent. The other 50% probably own single family home, condo’s and townhouses which don’t occupy much space / acres. So, I would think that the top 10 would own the majority of the land. Think about 1,000+ acre ranches out west. Also, there are a lot of companies that own huge swaths of land for resource exploration.
If it were divided like this image, that would be an improvement. At least then everyone would own some land. As it is, the land is much more concentrated in the top percentages than this picture indicates. And fewer people are able to buy land now than in the past, so the concentration is likely increasing.
WHO CARES WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE! This is not communist country! We are the most fortunate nation on the planet, and instead of being grateful that we aren’t going to bed starving every night or being ruled by a murderous dictator, we’re whining that the rich need to give us their money? Maybe the whiny OWS brats should do something valuable with their time, like help starving children, instead of not going to work and accepting that no matter how bad they think we have it, we’re still a million times better off than the majority of the world.
So many people fail to take into account the fact that so little people are as driven as many others. I am not saying that 99% of the US does not work, simply that a large majority of that percentage seem to believe (very wrongfully sometimes) that their lack of hard work should demand a slice of the wealthy’s income. We no longer live in a nation not of individualism, where one can (and yearns to!) “pull himself up by his bootstraps,” but rather a nation in which its citizens do not accept responsibility for financial mistakes, and expect something for nothing. I definitely am not within the wealthiest 1%, but sure as the sun will rise in the morning, I will never label myself to be one of the 99%.
The communists tried the alternative, and look what mess they live in.
Not mention, the government (the people)owns about half the land. I don’t see that on your OWS map.
I don’t remember owning land as part of the Constitution or Declaration of Independence. One reason for the “great recession” was that people who should NOT have owned land were given loans to purchase land/homes. And this was done at the order of the Feds through Fanny & Freddie, which used to be a gov’t department. Who’s the 2nd all-time leader in handouts from those organizations? Obama…after 1 term in the Congress. Just something to think about.
The remaining 90% can have it.
Only nationalization or flat out communism can resolve this and not without blood, “Conscription” and the destruction of the very fabric of America -not gonna happen! like it or lump it! That’s the way it is! U.S.A. doomed by her own successes .
That’s absurd. This situation can be improved very easily. Simply increase taxes on wealthy people. That’s how we’ve always had it and it worked well. People were able to get very wealthy, good for them, and they would pay a lot of taxes when they did. It simply reduces their share of the net wealth a bit. CEO’s would make 250x the median salary instead of 300x. They’d be fine. And as we paid down the debt and the $350B interest costs dropped taxes could be lowered on the lower classes and maintained on the upper. These deficits began in the 80’s and have accelerated ever since we stopped taxing wealth. Simple fiscal conservatism demands that the bills of the United States have to be paid with taxes as we go along. Common sense demands that those who are most fortunate should pay the bulk of it. This would be obvious and easy to implement if the right wing weren’t filling people’s heads with misinformation and obstructing debate in Congress.
Yeah that’s a great plan! in fact why don’t we just ask the government to steal every hard working Americans possessions and then divide it evenly among everyone else.
A higher tax on the wealthiest, those job “creators,” forces them to either reinvest the money into their companies, which means more jobs, or lose it to the government where it is redistributed in public services, meaning more jobs (necessarily via more demand). Low taxes on the wealthy doesn’t create jobs, it only lines the pockets of people who already have money. You can’t stir demand in our economy by cutting taxes, only by getting more money to the greatest number of people, the 90% who have so little of it.
If the best way to do it is raising taxes on the wealthiest members of our society? Well, I for one would be glad to see O’Reily off the air.
Why would the 1% want THAT part? Sure they get California and Seattle (the good part of Washington) but the rest is pretty much worthless.
Because it’s the temperate climate zones, meaning the rest of us would be pushed south to bake i nthe heat.
As an Australian, this image has no impact on me. We’re very used to the idea of having fewer people in our continent than many large cities of the world.
The point isnt population distrubution it’s wealth distribution.
This picture actually pleases me, it is capitalism at its best, money should be able to buy anything if you legally earn it.
Capitalism at it’s best? You’re looking at an oligarchy, and the end result of unregulated capitalism. Generational wealth is not earned, it’s inherited.
Yeah, the issue is that ‘legally’ is a very easily manipulated thing for those in the upper 1%. Do you have enough money to lobby for tax reform and financial laws to be changed?
the REAL shocking “split” is the 80/20 divide.
20% owns 93% of everything. leaving us 80% with 7% to squabble over.
show “THAT” split.
What happened to Alaska?
I think your missing a couple of states… Or are Alaska and Hawaii not part of the US anymore?
This represents everything wrong in America.. Not because 10% is ultra rich, but because many Americans want everything given to them. Those 10% are where they are because they bust their freaking butt working.
You’re ignorant.
Everyone is told that if you work hard you can climb your way up the ladder and make more money. Your average person wants to believe this because they want to be in the upper echelon. The upper echelon want people to believe this because people like ^ support them.
If you want the truth, look at upward mobility. This shows how many people actually move from lower to higher payed incomes. The fact is, the rich stay rich and the poor stay poor. How hard you ‘bust your freaking butt’ off doesn’t matter as much as how rich your dad was.
So this whole OWS movement is really people complaining that they weren’t in the Lucky Sperm Club?
/s
At 22 I had 50K in student loans and >$100 in my checking account and was living in a real dump. Ten years later I have made it to the top 10%. My parents were never even in the top 50%. The system is not rigged. I simply put in the effort.
Look, I was able to do that too, but you’re just being a dick about it. I was able to do it because I’m smart, I had a modest but involved family and I stayed healthy. I bet you take those things for granted. Not everyone has the advantages you’ve had. Now that we’re doing alright, why shouldn’t we be more responsible for paying for things we need like roads, schools, police, fire, defense, regulators, whatever? Why shouldn’t people who’ve been really fortunate pay even more? Why would you want to make things harder on people who aren’t doing very well?
Well, at least we get the sunny and warm part…
It is actually worse than this graphic displays. The bottom half of the country would have to live in Key West:
http://www.jmooneyham.com/the-huge-mountain-of-cash-separating-the-rich-from-everyone-else.html
http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/wealth.html
http://www.politifact.com/wisconsin/statements/2011/mar/10/michael-moore/michael-moore-says-400-americans-have-more-wealth-/
You say if….. I think this is a fair representation of what it looks like. Not the exact boundries, but most of the land is owned by the top 10%. Almost 40% of people rent. The other 50% probably own single family home, condo’s and townhouses which don’t occupy much space / acres. So, I would think that the top 10 would own the majority of the land. Think about 1,000+ acre ranches out west. Also, there are a lot of companies that own huge swaths of land for resource exploration.
If it were divided like this image, that would be an improvement. At least then everyone would own some land. As it is, the land is much more concentrated in the top percentages than this picture indicates. And fewer people are able to buy land now than in the past, so the concentration is likely increasing.
So all the poor people get the nice weather of LA, San Diego, Texas and Florida? Nice!!
WHO CARES WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE! This is not communist country! We are the most fortunate nation on the planet, and instead of being grateful that we aren’t going to bed starving every night or being ruled by a murderous dictator, we’re whining that the rich need to give us their money? Maybe the whiny OWS brats should do something valuable with their time, like help starving children, instead of not going to work and accepting that no matter how bad they think we have it, we’re still a million times better off than the majority of the world.
My feelings exactly! People should be grateful for the good things america has to offer instead of complaining that they don’t have enough stuff.
So many people fail to take into account the fact that so little people are as driven as many others. I am not saying that 99% of the US does not work, simply that a large majority of that percentage seem to believe (very wrongfully sometimes) that their lack of hard work should demand a slice of the wealthy’s income. We no longer live in a nation not of individualism, where one can (and yearns to!) “pull himself up by his bootstraps,” but rather a nation in which its citizens do not accept responsibility for financial mistakes, and expect something for nothing. I definitely am not within the wealthiest 1%, but sure as the sun will rise in the morning, I will never label myself to be one of the 99%.
What about Alaska, my leftest friends. Federal Government owns it mostly. We are pretty much all top 15%ers there.
This fails to point out that 25% of the US is federally owned.
Take everything someone has worked hard for and pass it around for all to have.
Stop this COMMUNIST rant ! Look around.
Your lucky to live in the USA.
The communists tried the alternative, and look what mess they live in.
Not mention, the government (the people)owns about half the land. I don’t see that on your OWS map.
I don’t remember owning land as part of the Constitution or Declaration of Independence. One reason for the “great recession” was that people who should NOT have owned land were given loans to purchase land/homes. And this was done at the order of the Feds through Fanny & Freddie, which used to be a gov’t department. Who’s the 2nd all-time leader in handouts from those organizations? Obama…after 1 term in the Congress. Just something to think about.