The poor get richer
 

For right now I Agree with them. But in the future, if the times are tight... the rich will be sitting pretty while the poor will starve.

JM

Read the article. It describes why the bottom fifth can spend twice as much as they earn.

Ahhh, the bottom quintile includes people who aren't really poor. So how does that prove the poor are doing fine?

Originally posted by Kuciwalker
Interesting, the biggest differences are in taxes (duh) and education. And savings (investments).

"At the average wage, a VCR fell from 365 hours in 1972 to a mere two hours today. A cellphone dropped from 456 hours in 1984 to four hours. A personal computer, jazzed up with thousands of times the computing power of the 1984 I.B.M., declined from 435 hours to 25 hours. Even cars are taking a smaller toll on our bank accounts: in the past decade, the work-time price of a mid-size Ford sedan declined by 6 percent."

All of these products, except for cars, got cheaper because the price was high in the first place. Indeed, the wealthier have the latest and best devices with more gadgets, and the poor have the old models with out all the bells and whisles.

They tried to make this a pro cheap foreign labor piece and it falls on it's ass. The situation would be exactly the same without the use of cheap labor.

They are complete idiots who know nothing about business and the economy.

Originally posted by Krill
Atleast the poor get something, though, right?

Right? Read my sig line. http://www.discussworldissues.com/fo...ilies/wink.gif

Originally posted by Patroklos


Yes Kid, in order for things to be cheaper now they had to be more expensive before, very good. http://www.discussworldissues.com/fo...s/welldone.gif When new products with new features on them come out they have to make the old products cheaper. Do you understand that?

Originally posted by Vanguard
the data in this editorial are highly questionable You may not know this, so I'll clue you in. An editorial is the opinion of the paper's editorial board. This article is not an editorial. It was clearly marked by me and the NY Times as an opinion piece.

Originally posted by DanS


You may not know this, so I'll clue you in. An editorial is the opinion of the paper's editorial board. This article is not an editorial. It was clearly marked by me and the NY Times as an opinion piece. Yea, the guy who wrote it is an economist and even writes for the Fed. That's worse than the WSJ writing it.

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
Any rent I collect is not taxed as income. http://www.discussworldissues.com/fo...smilies/hm.gif

Originally posted by DanS


You may not know this, so I'll clue you in. An editorial is the opinion of the paper's editorial board. This article is not an editorial. It was clearly marked by me and the NY Times as an opinion piece. Snark is fun and all, but it helps if you have a leg to stand on. As it is you posted a pile of crapola as an "interesting opinion piece" about how the good times are a'rollin' for the poor. It was shredded in short order, and this is the best you can do?

-Arrian

Originally posted by Arrian
Snark is fun and all, but it helps if you have a leg to stand on. As it is you posted a pile of crapola as an "interesting opinion piece" about how the good times are a'rollin' for the poor. It was shredded in short order, and this is the best you can do? I must have missed the part where it was "shredded in short order." On first pass, I didn't see any points that were worth responding to. But if you think there are particularly good points that I missed, then I'd be willing to respond to those.

Also, charity and government services for the poor might not be as good. For example, I had to get some food from the food bank a few weeks ago and the quality was very bad. The food didn't even go together, like I got taco shells with nothing else to make tacos with. O.M.G.

Originally posted by Arrian
Snark is fun and all, but it helps if you have a leg to stand on. As it is you posted a pile of crapola as an "interesting opinion piece" about how the good times are a'rollin' for the poor. It was shredded in short order, and this is the best you can do?

-Arrian There's only one poster in this thread who ever might be worth responding to, and he hasn't made a particularly strong challenge IMO.

Originally posted by Kuciwalker


There's only one poster in this thread who ever might be worth responding to, and he hasn't made a particularly strong challenge IMO. College freshmen aren't allowed in ivory towers.

If the editorial is true, calculating the national inequality with the Gini Coeff. is not representative of the reality?

I'm not sure I buy into the idea that just because low-class people can buy DVD players and so forth, means that they are doing better.

Can you eat a vcr, dumbass? Can you sleep in one at night?

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
Can you eat a vcr, dumbass? Can you sleep in one at night? ... So, are you suggesting that housing and food price has increased relatively to wage?


..... oops I forgot to say; Dumbasshttp://www.discussworldissues.com/fo...ilies/wink.gif http://www.discussworldissues.com/fo...ies/tongue.gif

Originally posted by CrONoS

... So, are you suggesting that housing and food price has increased relatively to wage? Yes.