now something more serious....

[callmeslick]

This is worth a read(or two, for most of us to digest it)--it is a scholarly look at wealth/income inequality, what is bad about too great a disparity, and current thinking about how to address it from a true, real Conservative. Good stuff.
http://www.frontporchrepublic.com/2014/ ... es-future/

[Tunnelcat]

The return of the Gilded Age and the rise of Dynastic Wealth.

http://www.thebradentontimes.com/news/2 ... e_canucks/

http://www.prisonplanet.com/worst-inequ ... olicy.html

[Tunnelcat]

Maybe there is hope. Perhaps Americans are finally figuring out who the real crooks are who running our supposedly "free market system" and making out like bandits. I liked this guy's letter in our paper today. Kind of sums it up for me.

http://www.gazettetimes.com/news/opinio ... f887a.html

[callmeslick]

good find, TC. Maybe his letter and around 40 million more, and you have a movement. I don't completely agree with the guy. My quarrels?

1. You have always had sharp operators on Wall Street.
2. The big money/old money always wins in virtually any situation(up market, down market, whatever), because their cash is more readily liquid.
3. Much of what he whines about is due to many electronic trading platforms, without anyone having a clear handle on how best to regulate
and thus, seemingly some new corruption. There might be those diving on short term opportunities in this situation, but, see point #1

[Tunnelcat]

You'll have to admit that a lot of the shenanigans that led to the 2008 crash are still going on and that greed is driving it. The bankers and traders are STILL trying to chip away at Dodd Frank. I'm glad that people in this country are finally getting pissed off and are starting to see where the true boogeyman lies. But you want to know what I think the next big Wall Street Hedge Fund scam is going to be? Reverse mortgages. I can just smell it with all those constant TV ads targeted towards boomer seniors by the likes of Fred Thompson and Henry Winkler. They've got both conservative and liberal minded seniors covered with those two polar opposites shilling for the banks.

[woodchip]

While you two are fishing in the private industry lake, try doing so in the public lake:

"The Center for Responsive Politics analyzed the personal financial disclosure data from 2012 of the 534 current members of Congress and found that, for the first time, more than half had an average net worth of $1 million or more: 268 to be exact, up from 257 the year earlier. The median for congressional Democrats was $1.04 million and, for Republicans, $1 million even."

"In 2010, the year of the most recently released financial data, the estimated median net worth of a current U.S. senator stood at an average of $2.63 million, according to the Center's research.

Despite the global economic meltdown in 2008 and sluggish recovery, that's up about 11 percent* from an estimated median net worth of about $2.38 million in 2009, according to the Center's analysis. And it's up about 16 percent* from a median estimated net worth of $2.27 million in 2008."

So keep crying about private business while the politicians are laughing their collective asses off at you.

[Krom]

Yeah woodchip, and where exactly do you think the money all these members of congress got so quickly came from? If you think it came from their government salary, I've got a bridge I'm willing to sell you.

[callmeslick]

You'll have to admit that a lot of the shenanigans that led to the 2008 crash are still going on and that greed is driving it.

my point was that such things, of some sort, ALWAYS go on, which is why stricter financial regulation is a must. Even then, rubes should always be wary of the financial markets.

The bankers and traders are STILL trying to chip away at Dodd Frank. I'm glad that people in this country are finally getting pissed off and are starting to see where the true boogeyman lies. But you want to know what I think the next big Wall Street Hedge Fund scam is going to be? Reverse mortgages. I can just smell it with all those constant TV ads targeted towards boomer seniors by the likes of Fred Thompson and Henry Winkler. They've got both conservative and liberal minded seniors covered with those two polar opposites shilling for the banks.

well, they ARE a bit of a scam. Have been around for a while, but you're right, they are being shilled heavily. No way they'll result in a bubble, as they so heavily undervalue the property being mortgaged. They will simply wipe out a lot of good folks with dubious retirement finances.

[callmeslick]

While you two are fishing in the private industry lake, try doing so in the public lake:

"The Center for Responsive Politics analyzed the personal financial disclosure data from 2012 of the 534 current members of Congress and found that, for the first time, more than half had an average net worth of $1 million or more: 268 to be exact, up from 257 the year earlier. The median for congressional Democrats was $1.04 million and, for Republicans, $1 million even."

"In 2010, the year of the most recently released financial data, the estimated median net worth of a current U.S. senator stood at an average of $2.63 million, according to the Center's research.

Despite the global economic meltdown in 2008 and sluggish recovery, that's up about 11 percent* from an estimated median net worth of about $2.38 million in 2009, according to the Center's analysis. And it's up about 16 percent* from a median estimated net worth of $2.27 million in 2008."

So keep crying about private business while the politicians are laughing their collective asses off at you.

TC brought this up when it came out, and though I got vilified for saying it, a net worth of 1 million dollars is paltry for a late- middle aged white male, which most of the members of Congress are. Senators have always come from a wealthier class of people, so 2.2.mil isn't impressive in that crowd, either. Hell, they just listed Biden's financial status(pertinent as he was a long-time Senator) he actually has a mortgage on his house down the road. Real wealthy people don't need mortgages. Hell, I'm a lower-end player in that pool and never took out a mortgage or a car loan in my life.

[woodchip]

Yeah woodchip, and where exactly do you think the money all these members of congress got so quickly came from? If you think it came from their government salary, I've got a bridge I'm willing to sell you.

I think Krom, you read my post wrong. What you are saying is exactly what I'm saying. While most folks concentrate on ebil corporate executives, the real evil lies in congress and the senate. Indeed, how does one become a multi-millionaire on a govt salary.

[woodchip]

While you two are fishing in the private industry lake, try doing so in the public lake:

"The Center for Responsive Politics analyzed the personal financial disclosure data from 2012 of the 534 current members of Congress and found that, for the first time, more than half had an average net worth of $1 million or more: 268 to be exact, up from 257 the year earlier. The median for congressional Democrats was $1.04 million and, for Republicans, $1 million even."

"In 2010, the year of the most recently released financial data, the estimated median net worth of a current U.S. senator stood at an average of $2.63 million, according to the Center's research.

Despite the global economic meltdown in 2008 and sluggish recovery, that's up about 11 percent* from an estimated median net worth of about $2.38 million in 2009, according to the Center's analysis. And it's up about 16 percent* from a median estimated net worth of $2.27 million in 2008."

So keep crying about private business while the politicians are laughing their collective asses off at you.

TC brought this up when it came out, and though I got vilified for saying it, a net worth of 1 million dollars is paltry for a late- middle aged white male, which most of the members of Congress are. Senators have always come from a wealthier class of people, so 2.2.mil isn't impressive in that crowd, either. Hell, they just listed Biden's financial status(pertinent as he was a long-time Senator) he actually has a mortgage on his house down the road. Real wealthy people don't need mortgages. Hell, I'm a lower-end player in that pool and never took out a mortgage or a car loan in my life.

Yet that "paltry" couple of mil puts them in the 1% category that the left vilifies as having too much money.

[flip]

how does one become a multi-millionaire on a govt salary.

Ask Harry Reid!

[Will Robinson]

I think what Krom might be pointing to is, ultimately, the corrupt politicians get their millions from the private sector buying favors.

In my opinion that doesn't mean the 'real problem' is the private sector though because the government makes the law and is the arbiter of what is acceptable and if the 'government' is selling favors then of course those who can afford them are going to be buying...

So the 'source' isn't the buyer with the money...it is the product; the bribe...the exemption...the exchange of regulation for donation, etc. etc.

It IS the congress and president. They are the head of the serpent.

[Tunnelcat]

I think what Krom might be pointing to is, ultimately, the corrupt politicians get their millions from the private sector buying favors.

In my opinion that doesn't mean the 'real problem' is the private sector though because the government makes the law and is the arbiter of what is acceptable and if the 'government' is selling favors then of course those who can afford them are going to be buying...

So the 'source' isn't the buyer with the money...it is the product; the bribe...the exemption...the exchange of regulation for donation, etc. etc.

It IS the congress and president. They are the head of the serpent.

No, you've got it wrong. The public sector is the head, the government is just it's tool since snakes have no limbs. It wasn't the government that brought down the markets in 1929 or 2008 either. It was private sector greed.

[Will Robinson]

I think what Krom might be pointing to is, ultimately, the corrupt politicians get their millions from the private sector buying favors.

In my opinion that doesn't mean the 'real problem' is the private sector though because the government makes the law and is the arbiter of what is acceptable and if the 'government' is selling favors then of course those who can afford them are going to be buying...

So the 'source' isn't the buyer with the money...it is the product; the bribe...the exemption...the exchange of regulation for donation, etc. etc.

It IS the congress and president. They are the head of the serpent.

No, you've got it wrong. The public sector is the head, the government is just it's tool since snakes have no limbs. It wasn't the government that brought down the markets in 1929 or 2008 either. It was private sector greed.

I thought it was evil republican deregulation? Thats what you said before...
thus it IS government.

Ultimately it is the authority that is the head. The rule makers that exempt certain people from the rules (people with enough money) are the head. They control who gets to take a bite and who gets bitten.
All capitalism is "greedy" by design. Nothing wrong with that. Unfettered it can ruin lots of people and things so there is regulation. When the regulation isn't applied properly, either too strictly or not strong enough is when you have failures and it is government, and only government, that can apply the proper amount of regulation.

Another way to look at it. You can't solve these problems by doing away with profit or commerce, etc. obviously that is too destructive. You can only solve these problems with proper government. So if you fix government you solve the problem. At least to what ever degree a human activity can be made to be 'fixed'.

[callmeslick]

Yet that "paltry" couple of mil puts them in the 1% category that the left vilifies as having too much money.

that is net-worth, you should have noted, had you really read what you posted. And, no, $1 million net worth does NOT put you into the 1% of middle aged males. I'd guess around the top 10% someplace, but certainly not the top 1%

edit--refer to the chart at the bottom of the article about net worth. MEDIAN net worth for households headed by a 55 year to 65 year old is $202,000,
average is 880,000. That is for all demographics, and since we're talking about Congress, you'd have to limit your ranges to WHITE households which would likely double the median, at least. Thus 50% of all households are worth more than 400,000, which sounds right to me. Thus, 1 million would put you into the dreaded 25%, not the 1%.
http://www.joshuakennon.com/a-look-at-h ... -finances/

[callmeslick]

Another way to look at it. You can't solve these problems by doing away with profit or commerce, etc. obviously that is too destructive. You can only solve these problems with proper government. So if you fix government you solve the problem. At least to what ever degree a human activity can be made to be 'fixed'.

I'd agree with all of this. The rub lies in that SO many people view 'fixing' government as slashing the scale of government. If anything, you want a bigger and more complex government with a lot more robust laws and regulations and especially independant oversight.