Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
So what? It won't take any money out of my pocket unless I choose to invest in one of their companies which I would only do at my own risk. My own known risk. ROI anyone?
Personally, I'm glad to send my money to Amazon and glad they exist and glad I didn't have to take the risk for them to exist.
That statistic does not pass the sniff test. Inflation (CPI-U) for that period was a factor of 7.4. You're suggesting wages grew by another factor of 7.81 beyond inflation. Multiplying those two we get a wage growth factor of about 58 in nominal dollars. Now working backwards, let's use $10/hr as a bottom quintile wage in 2017. That's a guess on my part, but IMO a reasonable guess. Applying the factor of 58, we arrive at a bottom quintile wage of 17 cents per hour in 1967.
Considering the federal minimum wage was $1/hr in 1967, a wage of 17 cents/hr seems unlikely. To put this in some perspective, in 1967 17 cents could buy half a gallon of gasoline, or about three and a half postage stamps. Were wages really that awful? I was a child at the time so I don't have personal work experience to support or refute any of these numbers. I made around $3/hr in my first paid jobs during the late 1970s, doing manual farm labor.
Here is a meticulously researched treatise:
The Myth of American Inequality: How Government Biases Policy Debate
by Phil Gramm, Robert Ekelund, & John Early
Quote:
Everything you know about income inequality, poverty, and other measures of economic well-being in America is wrong. In this provocative book, a former United States senator, eminent economist, and a former senior leader at the Bureau of Labor Statistics challenge the prevailing consensus that income inequality is a growing threat to American society. By taking readers on a deep dive into the way government measures economic well-being, they demonstrate that our official statistics dramatically overstate inequality. Getting the facts straight reveals that the key measures of well-being are greater than the official statistics of the country would lead us to believe. Income inequality is lower today than at any time in post- World War II
The world was created unequal and unfair. Some people are born tall, short, poor, rich, ugly, attractive, fat genetics, skinny genetics, bald genetics, hairy genetics, big nose, flat butt, low IQ, high IQ, big penis, small penis, light skinned, dark skinned, allergies, disorders, deformities, disabilities, etc.
When the government can legislate the unequal outcome between siblings born under the same roof, then maybe they can legislate the inequality of wealth.
Quote:
The first lesson of economics is scarcity: There is never enough of anything to satisfy all those who want it. - Thomas Sowell
People who can pass the cost of inflation down will get richer. It's just math. People who don't have inflation adjusted income will bear the brunt of the inflation tax.
Why nobody angry at the Federal Government for QE and money printing.
People who can pass the cost of inflation down will get richer. It's just math. People who don't have inflation adjusted income will bear the brunt of the inflation tax.
Why nobody angry at the Federal Government for QE and money printing.
The QEs and increases in money supply after the '08 bust and various accommodations during the pandemic kept us out of a new economic Stone Age.
People who can pass the cost of inflation down will get richer. It's just math. People who don't have inflation adjusted income will bear the brunt of the inflation tax.
Why nobody angry at the Federal Government for QE and money printing.
A famous economist once said, "Nothing is either good or bad save the alternatives make it look that way."
The federal government engaged in a $5 Trillion helicopter drop during the pandemic with a goal of preventing the economy from crashing. In hindsight, that helicopter drop was excessive. But at the time, the federal government was doing its best in a world of both risks and uncertainties.
And yes, politicians being political, there was a ton of pork.
So what? It won't take any money out of my pocket unless I choose to invest in one of their companies which I would only do at my own risk. My own known risk. ROI anyone?
Personally, I'm glad to send my money to Amazon and glad they exist and glad I didn't have to take the risk for them to exist.
I agree, and the income tax code has been structured just for that. The top 1% of taxable income filers pay 25% of all income taxes. The bottom 50% of filers pay 3% of all income taxes.
So what? It won't take any money out of my pocket unless I choose to invest in one of their companies which I would only do at my own risk. My own known risk. ROI anyone?
This. Multimillionaire? Billionaire? Be still my beating heart NOT. !
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
!
