Top 20% doing very well
Bruce_the_vii @ Thu Jul 14, 2011 6:29 am
The Conference Board of Canada is reporting that the income gap between the top 20% and the bottom 20% is large and growing.
"Between 1976 and 2009 the earnings gap between the lowest 20 per cent and the top 20 per cent of earners grew from $92,300 to $177,500, showing that income growth is being distributed unequally."
http://www.thestar.com/news/article/102 ... owing?bn=1
Without rocking the boat too much you could put more attention on the wages at the very bottom, minimum wage, and if we need a tax to cover the deficit - stick it to the top 20%.
andyt @ Thu Jul 14, 2011 7:52 am
Bruce_the_vii Bruce_the_vii:
The Conference Board of Canada is reporting that the income gap between the top 20% and the bottom 20% is large and growing.
"Between 1976 and 2009 the earnings gap between the lowest 20 per cent and the top 20 per cent of earners grew from $92,300 to $177,500, showing that income growth is being distributed unequally."
http://www.thestar.com/news/article/102 ... owing?bn=1
Without rocking the boat too much you could put more attention on the wages at the very bottom, minimum wage, and if we need a tax to cover the deficit - stick it to the top 20%.
"Between 1976 and 2009 the earnings gap between the lowest 20 per cent and the top 20 per cent of earners grew from $92,300 to $177,500, showing that income growth is being distributed unequally."
http://www.thestar.com/news/article/102 ... owing?bn=1
Without rocking the boat too much you could put more attention on the wages at the very bottom, minimum wage, and if we need a tax to cover the deficit - stick it to the top 20%.
You know that's not possible Bruce. As people on this forum will explain to you, any wage increase on the bottom just results in inflation which negates the increase. For some reason this doesn't happen at the top. Also, the top 20% deserve every penny they earn, while the bottom 20% are ungrateful if they ask for more.
bootlegga @ Thu Jul 14, 2011 8:03 am
Bruce_the_vii Bruce_the_vii:
The Conference Board of Canada is reporting that the income gap between the top 20% and the bottom 20% is large and growing.
"Between 1976 and 2009 the earnings gap between the lowest 20 per cent and the top 20 per cent of earners grew from $92,300 to $177,500, showing that income growth is being distributed unequally."
http://www.thestar.com/news/article/102 ... owing?bn=1
Without rocking the boat too much you could put more attention on the wages at the very bottom, minimum wage, and if we need a tax to cover the deficit - stick it to the top 20%.
"Between 1976 and 2009 the earnings gap between the lowest 20 per cent and the top 20 per cent of earners grew from $92,300 to $177,500, showing that income growth is being distributed unequally."
http://www.thestar.com/news/article/102 ... owing?bn=1
Without rocking the boat too much you could put more attention on the wages at the very bottom, minimum wage, and if we need a tax to cover the deficit - stick it to the top 20%.
It doesn't bother me - but then again, I don't think I'm in the top 20%. Even if I was though, I'm not adverse to paying taxes.
I appreciate the high level of services we have in Canada and understand they cost more then the user-pay systems other nations have.
bootlegga @ Thu Jul 14, 2011 8:06 am
andyt andyt:
You know that's not possible Bruce. As people on this forum will explain to you, any wage increase on the bottom just results in inflation which negates the increase. For some reason this doesn't happen at the top. Also, the top 20% deserve every penny they earn, while the bottom 20% are ungrateful if they ask for more.
Trolling again?
Bruce_the_vii @ Thu Jul 14, 2011 8:11 am
It does bother me. I'm a bourgeois and that people aren't doing well sticks in my craw. That's supposed to be what the country is about.
I wonder just how the top 20% are doing better. Is it professional couples with big corporations hauling in the bucks or is it investment income. I find it an interesting statistic and would like to see it broken down.
I don't think the government can hit the top 20% with taxes but I'd like to see some movement towards a more generally prosperous country.
bootlegga @ Thu Jul 14, 2011 8:24 am
Bruce_the_vii Bruce_the_vii:
It does bother me. I'm a bourgeois and that people aren't doing well sticks in my craw. That's supposed to be what the country is about.
I wonder just how the top 20% are doing better. Is it professional couples with big corporations hauling in the bucks or is it investment income. I find it an interesting statistic and would like to see it broken down.
I don't think the government can hit the top 20% with taxes but I'd like to see some movement towards a more generally prosperous country.
I wonder just how the top 20% are doing better. Is it professional couples with big corporations hauling in the bucks or is it investment income. I find it an interesting statistic and would like to see it broken down.
I don't think the government can hit the top 20% with taxes but I'd like to see some movement towards a more generally prosperous country.
What I meant was that taxing the top 20% doesn't bother me - I should have been more clear.
People living shitty lives bothers me too. On one thing I do agree with Andy, poverty costs all of us. It actually costs society more to take care of a homeless person (constant health care crises, run-ins with the law, addictions problems, etc) than it does to build subsidized housing and support them like anyone else.
But I'm a firm believer in the motto, "Give a man a fish, feed him for a day, teach a man to fish and feed him forever", which is why I feel helping people get education/training is much better than minimum wage increases.
You can give someone a handout like Andy suggests (raising minimum to $11.11 or something like that), of which part will definitely be lost to inflation, or even worse job losses.
Or you can train people to type, be a plumber or an accountant.
Then they not only earn a real living, they contribute to the tax base and make society better for everyone. Education doesn't only have to mean a bachelors degree, it can be night courses in office administration, helping people get started in a trade, even helping someone start their own business.
Bruce_the_vii @ Thu Jul 14, 2011 8:36 am
bootlegga bootlegga:
Bruce_the_vii Bruce_the_vii:
It does bother me. I'm a bourgeois and that people aren't doing well sticks in my craw. That's supposed to be what the country is about.
I wonder just how the top 20% are doing better. Is it professional couples with big corporations hauling in the bucks or is it investment income. I find it an interesting statistic and would like to see it broken down.
I don't think the government can hit the top 20% with taxes but I'd like to see some movement towards a more generally prosperous country.
I wonder just how the top 20% are doing better. Is it professional couples with big corporations hauling in the bucks or is it investment income. I find it an interesting statistic and would like to see it broken down.
I don't think the government can hit the top 20% with taxes but I'd like to see some movement towards a more generally prosperous country.
What I meant was that taxing the top 20% doesn't bother me - I should have been more clear.
People living shitty lives bothers me too. On one thing I do agree with Andy, poverty costs all of us. It actually costs society more to take care of a homeless person (constant health care crises, run-ins with the law, addictions problems, etc) than it does to build subsidized housing and support them like anyone else.
But I'm a firm believer in the motto, "Give a man a fish, feed him for a day, teach a man to fish and feed him forever", which is why I feel helping people get education/training is much better than minimum wage increases.
You can give someone a handout like Andy suggests (raising minimum to $11.11 or something like that), of which part will definitely be lost to inflation, or even worse job losses.
Or you can train people to type, be a plumber or an accountant.
Then they not only earn a real living, they contribute to the tax base and make society better for everyone. Education doesn't only have to mean a bachelors degree, it can be night courses in office administration, helping people get started in a trade, even helping someone start their own business.
Canada is pretty much a meritocracy like the USA. People believe in hard work, education and rewarding these with better wages. All what you say is pretty much accepted. However you have to keep an eye on disparity, to keep the game fair and reasonable. For example the low wage sector is now large and the whole sector should be downsized. That's just gotten rid of in part.
Bruce_the_vii @ Thu Jul 14, 2011 9:24 am
There's the possibility that the top 20% improving is a type of localized stagflation. Big companies paying more and more for a small, static, pool of top people.
Zipperfish @ Thu Jul 14, 2011 10:29 am
Them that has, gets.
andyt @ Thu Jul 14, 2011 10:51 am
Zipperfish Zipperfish:
Them that has, gets.
Until it all falls apart. The success of the western economies was built on a strong middle class that worked hard because they saw the rewards of it, and that co-operated with creating a stable democratic state. If that middle class is destroyed, so is the peaceful sort of existence we take for granted here. Do the people who think this sort of inequality is a good thing really want to live in 3rd world style conditions, even if they are at the top.
andyt @ Thu Jul 14, 2011 10:55 am
bootlegga bootlegga:
It doesn't bother me - but then again, I don't think I'm in the top 20%. Even if I was though, I'm not adverse to paying taxes.
$1:
the 246,000 people whose average income was $405,000
Is this you, boots?
Zipperfish @ Thu Jul 14, 2011 10:57 am
andyt andyt:
Zipperfish Zipperfish:
Them that has, gets.
Until it all falls apart.
I don't give a shit as long as I'm raking it in with both hands. Just this morning I passed a homeless person on the street begging for spare change. I clapped him on the back, gave him a big smile and said "Sorry, schmuk, alls I got is fifties."
Then there's the other bum who asked me for some spare change because he had no money. "You got no money?" I said. "That's right," he said. I said, "If someone came along right now and gave me $500,000, I'd be in exactly the same situation you're in."
bootlegga @ Thu Jul 14, 2011 11:09 am
andyt andyt:
bootlegga bootlegga:
It doesn't bother me - but then again, I don't think I'm in the top 20%. Even if I was though, I'm not adverse to paying taxes.
$1:
the 246,000 people whose average income was $405,000
Is this you, boots?Not even close - I'm firmly in the middle class.
Zipperfish @ Thu Jul 14, 2011 11:18 am
Everyone's middle class. They've done studies. Poor people tend to identify themsleves as middle class, and so do the rich.
Anyways, my favourite is bum pre-emption. Before the guy even has a chance to get a word in, say "Hey buddy, you gotta buck sos I can buy a coffee?" Works best when wearing a nice suit. Magic.
andyt @ Thu Jul 14, 2011 11:23 am
bootlegga bootlegga:
andyt andyt:
bootlegga bootlegga:
It doesn't bother me - but then again, I don't think I'm in the top 20%. Even if I was though, I'm not adverse to paying taxes.
$1:
the 246,000 people whose average income was $405,000
Is this you, boots?Not even close - I'm firmly in the middle class.
Paying taxes is only part of it. Do you really want a system where all the growth in wealth goes to the top 20% but then we bleed them for some taxes to give to the 80%? We need to find our way back to what we had - less income inequality in the first place. Only way to create society we all want to live in.