- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Is one major cause of wealth disparity a poor rate of return on social security?
Posted on 5/28/14 at 12:43 pm to WildTchoupitoulas
Posted on 5/28/14 at 12:43 pm to WildTchoupitoulas
Wild tchoupitoulas, you are making a few errors when you claim that wages have not kept up with productivity: first, you are only examining wage growth instead of total compensation. Second, you are omitting the effect of depreciation, which reduces real income but not productivity. I'm on my phone, so I can't link the graph, but since 1973, productivity has increased 100%, while hourly employee compensation has risen 77%. The 23% difference can be attributed to measurement errors that inflate productivity reports
2
Posted on 5/28/14 at 12:46 pm to HailHailtoMichigan!
OOh welfare is such a pejorative term. Call it a reward for lasting so long in life. Payment for building and maintaining society.
It's a safety net for senior citizens.
It's a safety net for senior citizens.
Posted on 5/28/14 at 12:49 pm to JEAUXBLEAUX
quote:
OOh welfare is such a pejorative term. Call it a reward for lasting so long in life.
I prefer to call welfare 'THEFT'. Because that's what it is.
Posted on 5/28/14 at 12:51 pm to JEAUXBLEAUX
quote:Structured the way you'd like it, it would only be a matter of time before there were tax brackets on it just like the income tax and about half of Americans wouldn't have to pay diddly squat.
OOh welfare is such a pejorative term. Call it a reward for lasting so long in life. Payment for building and maintaining society. It's a safety net for senior citizens.
Oh. And their benefits would start going UP too because, well, once you remove the "paid in, get out" process of it, that's pretty much guaranteed.
It's like you're 5 years old. Really, it is.
Posted on 5/28/14 at 12:58 pm to Zach
Marx said all profit is theft. We used to say all profit is gross (70s lingo) No eliminating the cap on taxes makes the whole system for equitable for all Americans. I am sure that's not your goal.
Posted on 5/28/14 at 1:04 pm to HailHailtoMichigan!
quote:
you are only examining wage growth instead of total compensation.
Like when I said this...?
quote:
Any increase in benefits is moderated by wage stagnation
quote:
The 23% difference can be attributed to measurement errors that inflate productivity reports
Sure, it can be, but then that would be dishonest.
In short, total compensation has not kept pace with increases in productivity. It really couldn't be simpler or more obvious.
The idea that it could be the rate of return on SS is absurd and, to my eyes, a blatant attempt to divert attention from the core issue to another attack on SS. The idea of tying the social safety net to the stock market is absurd. "Over the long term, the market averages a 5% return" may sound great, but retirement doesn't work that way. Suppose you turned 65 on September 16, 2008? Young people have time to recoup their losses after a market crash, but retirees don't.
Posted on 5/28/14 at 1:07 pm to JEAUXBLEAUX
quote:
Marx said all profit is theft.
Marx was wrong. Profit is a mutually agreed upon transaction between two parties.
quote:
We used to say all profit is gross (70s lingo)
'We'??? I was an adult in the 70s and never heard the phrase. You and I ran in different crowds. I was poor. But we didn't hate the rich and we knew why profit was a motivator to make good decisions in your life.
quote:
No eliminating the cap on taxes makes the whole system for equitable for all Americans. I am sure that's not your goal.
Equality is an unnatural state. It has never existed. It will never exist. I don't care about equality. I care about freedom.
Posted on 5/28/14 at 1:35 pm to WildTchoupitoulas
quote:
Wages have been out-paced by inflation since 1970. The purchasing power of the working class has consequently gotten smaller. When you have less disposable income, you have less for investment. Also since 1970 productivity has outpaced wage growth. That disparity goes to the owners of the means of production which rarely include the workers.
What the hell does this have to do with this thread?
Posted on 5/28/14 at 1:37 pm to Zach
quote:
Profit is a mutually agreed upon transaction between two parties.
No it isn't, Zach.
The cost of labor is set by the market primarily in terms of available labor. Profit is the difference between the cost of production and the price of the good or service in the market place. Nowhere is there any agreement between the producer and labor regarding how much the product or service will garner in the market.
The producer negotiates a wage for labor to produce a good or service. The producer markets the good or service for a price. If that price is equal to or below the producers cost, there is no profit.
While many would like to believe that the cost of a good or service in the marketplace is set by the cost of production + profit, that isn't how it's supposed to work. The wage is an agreed upon price between two parties - the producer and labor, and the price of a good or service is agreed upon by two parties - the producer and the consumer, the difference between the two is profit. I guess you could say that profit is the result of two mutually agreed upon transactions between three parties, the producer, labor and the consumer - the consumer and labor being theoretically unrelated.
Posted on 5/28/14 at 1:41 pm to Sid in Lakeshore
quote:
What the hell does this have to do with this thread?
A better explanation for the wealth disparity than the "rate of return on Social Security".
Sorry I didn't make that clear enough for you.
Hell, you could say, "The wealthy invest more wisely than the poor" as a better explanation for the wealth disparity than the OP.
Posted on 5/28/14 at 1:44 pm to Zach
quote:
I prefer to call welfare 'THEFT'. Because that's what it is.
It is no more a "theft" than any other tax. And taxes are absolutely necessary for our survival in this world, that is not debatable.
Posted on 5/28/14 at 2:03 pm to NC_Tigah
I see a few problems here....
1) 44,800 in 2013 dollars is still really high for income. Those that don't have houses, and don't have savings likely made less than this. So they contributed less than this.
2) this assumes people would actually save this money, especially at 44k, I don't see them doing it. I see them spending it.
SS is a bad system, mainly b.c the way its marketed, but changing the system IMHO doesn't change income inequality.
1) 44,800 in 2013 dollars is still really high for income. Those that don't have houses, and don't have savings likely made less than this. So they contributed less than this.
2) this assumes people would actually save this money, especially at 44k, I don't see them doing it. I see them spending it.
SS is a bad system, mainly b.c the way its marketed, but changing the system IMHO doesn't change income inequality.
Posted on 5/28/14 at 2:08 pm to Hawkeye95
quote:Actually . . . it is dead on.
1) 44,800 in 2013 dollars is still really high for income.
Posted on 5/28/14 at 2:10 pm to Sid in Lakeshore
quote:Payment for a service is very different from welfare.
It is no more a "theft" than any other tax
Posted on 5/28/14 at 2:14 pm to NC_Tigah
A lot of poor people get back more from Social Security than they ever put in, no? If they were only getting back what they invested, even with a higher rate of return, would they necessarily get more?
If everyone was getting a higher, but similar rate of return, on a determined percentage of their income, the investment returns would vary widely based on income. Lower income people may end up with more to retire on, but they effect on income disparity would seem minimal.
If everyone was getting a higher, but similar rate of return, on a determined percentage of their income, the investment returns would vary widely based on income. Lower income people may end up with more to retire on, but they effect on income disparity would seem minimal.
Posted on 5/28/14 at 2:16 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:
1) 44,800 in 2013 dollars is still really high for income.
Actually . . . it is dead on.
sure for the mid point, but many people make far less than this.
i know my wife is one of them. masters degree, yes, I will take the job that pays 30k please.
Posted on 5/28/14 at 2:20 pm to WildTchoupitoulas
quote:Has it?
Wages have been out-paced by inflation since 1970. The purchasing power of the working class has consequently gotten smaller.
Per capita personal income was $3893 in 1970 ( LINK)
Adjusted for inflation that would equate to an income of $23,036.33 in 2012.
But,
Per capita personal income was actually $42,693 in 2012.
Posted on 5/28/14 at 2:20 pm to WildTchoupitoulas
quote:
Profit is the difference between the cost of production and the price of the good or service in the market place. Nowhere is there any agreement between the producer and labor regarding how much the product or service will garner in the market.
No. The free mutual choice is between the producer and the consumer. If I want you to cut my grass (production of a service) and I agree to pay you 50 for 2 hours of work.. and it costs you 5 dollars of gas and 2 hours of your time you have made a 45 dollar profit. A profit we both agreed upon.
How is that profit 'theft'?
Posted on 5/28/14 at 2:22 pm to Hawkeye95
quote:What "point" would you suggest such calculations be based upon?
sure for the mid point, but many people make far less than this.
Posted on 5/28/14 at 2:23 pm to Sid in Lakeshore
quote:
It is no more a "theft" than any other tax. And taxes are absolutely necessary for our survival in this world, that is not debatable.
Wrong. If you and I pay a tax to build a bridge that we both can drive over it is not theft.
If the govt taxes me 100 bucks so that you can buy food because you're too damn lazy then it is theft.
All forms of welfare = theft.
Page 3 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News