View Poll Results: The data in this video is correct?

Voters
3. You may not vote on this poll
  • yes

    3 100.00%
  • no

    0 0%
Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 65

Thread: Wealth Inequality in America - Is the data correct?

  1. #21
    Quote Originally Posted by TopDogger View Post
    Well, good for you. And all the fact do support my viewpoint, especially what I said about the liberal idol called FDR. Obama is just trying to follow in his footsteps.

    Obama really stands for only two things, and his actions have made that abundantly clear. Create class warfare and divide the country.
    Good for me? Wow! Well enough said. I guess it's OK to attack those of a different view as lazy and all thats wrong with America. Shame and to think I wondered what happened to all the great folks that made up NB. Seems a lot of us are just out destroying the country you built. Anyway I wish you and yours the best.

  2. #22
    Quote Originally Posted by Alastor View Post
    Good for me? Wow! Well enough said. I guess it's OK to attack those of a different view as lazy and all thats wrong with America. Shame and to think I wondered what happened to all the great folks that made up NB. Seems a lot of us are just out destroying the country you built. Anyway I wish you and yours the best.
    I did not see anyone attack you at all, but you are a bit confused regarding the facts. We are simply responding to the misinformation you wrote. We actually welcome discussions at NB. All that we ask is that you support your "facts" with real facts and documentation, and not just Liberal opinions. Everyone has a viewpoint. My viewpoints are supported by facts.

    I do love the Moynihan quote. "Your are entitled to your opinions, but not your own facts." I've actually used that one myself. Moynihan was a non-partisan Democrat who probably would not have shared Obama's viewpoints on most issues. I did like the guy.

    I added proof for several of the facts that you disputed. Please go back and read the expanded response. If you want proof of anything else I said, just ask.
    "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote." -- Benjamin Franklin


  3. #23
    Quote Originally Posted by Alastor View Post
    Good for me? Wow! Well enough said. I guess it's OK to attack those of a different view as lazy and all thats wrong with America. Shame and to think I wondered what happened to all the great folks that made up NB. Seems a lot of us are just out destroying the country you built. Anyway I wish you and yours the best.
    Alastor, No hard fillings. We are just debating a contradictory debate. I apology if I insulted you in any way.
    ~Mike

  4. #24
    Quote Originally Posted by TopDogger View Post
    I did not see anyone attack you at all, but you are a bit confused regarding the facts. We are simply responding to the misinformation you wrote. We actually welcome discussions at NB. All that we ask is that you support your "facts" with real facts and documentation, and not just Liberal opinions. Everyone has a viewpoint. My viewpoints are supported by facts.

    I do love the Moynihan quote. "Your are entitled to your opinions, but not your own facts." I've actually used that one myself. Moynihan was a non-partisan Democrat who probably would not have shared Obama's viewpoints on most issues. I did like the guy.

    I added proof for several of the facts that you disputed. Please go back and read the expanded response. If you want proof of anything else I said, just ask.
    Who is this WE you speak of? I never said anyone other than YOU. And yes you attacked me as well as everyone else that doesn't agree with your view(s) by claiming we're lazy, we don't wish to earn like you do and just wish to hurt America.

    So to end this for me I'll just say:

    1. You seem to wish to skip over your comments which I took offense too in the first place.
    2. I don't take business advice from random people online nor do I take history lessons.
    3. I find your condescending attitude in very poor taste.
    4. I did not reply to your post to try an convince you to my way of thinking (as I'm sure your mind is set, as is mine).
    5. A debate is two side presenting their opposing views. Belittlement doesn't advance any debate.
    6. If you decide to talk to me as person, I'd be more than happy to debate. Till then I'm out.

  5. #25
    Quote Originally Posted by Mike30 View Post
    Alastor, No hard fillings. We are just debating a contradictory debate. I apology if I insulted you in any way.
    ~Mike
    Your quote of me was not addressed to you Mike. At no point did you insult me.

  6. #26
    Alastor, I did not attack you at all. This is the Politics and Religion forum where controversial issues are discussed. The original comment that you attacked was not directed at you because you were not even participating in the thread at that time. YOU challenged what I said, even though the facts fully support what I said and I provided proof. I am still waiting for proof to support your view. That is a friendly challenge.

    The "well, good for you" comment was directed at your choice for president. You got what you wished for. I still do not understand how you think that I said something about "voting for Obama makes you a lazy person." I never said that, but it is clear that the most people currently milking the system are Democrats. That does not make you part of that group unless you wish to be included in that group. If you are a hard worker, you should consider yourself excluded from the bums.

    I still challenge you to name one thing that Obama has done as President that benefited the country rather than just his Democrat constituents. There is good reason why he is currently tied with Bush as being the most divisive president in the history of the country. 86% of Democrats support what he is doing, while only 10% of Republicans support him. The 76% gap is the decisiveness index. The 86% Democrat support confirms my viewpoint that he is only focused on doing what is good for Democrats. All that conservatives want to see him do is something--anything--that is good for the country and non-partisan.

    None of this is personal, so please do not try to make it personal.
    "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote." -- Benjamin Franklin


  7. #27
    I really think that there are good things from both parties, the problem with Democrats or even with the left spectrum in all countries is that their agendas are not sustainable. If you take a look at what President Obama said and what he did are two different things.

    Today the middle class are not in better position but rather worse than what it was in 2008. No matter who is in charge, the bankers will dictate the policies of the country. What President Obama did first was helping the big banks, big businesses with the help of the federal bank reserve. Compared to what was done for the small businesses, small banks or even the people contradict his own words.

    The economy is a big mess, and I am sure if the federal bank reserve stops pumping money into the system, it will be catastrophic, which mean that we are not in the recovery path that the mainstream media propaganda told us.

    The stock market isn't an indicator of recovery, international investors could put more money in stocks, it doesn't mean that the economy is doing better, particularly when the economy is supported at 70% by comsuption. If people are unemployed (not the number from the BLS which is based on people having unemployment benefits, but the people with and without employment benefits), food stamps, etc do not have a buying power, things aren't going to be better.

    If the president was really interested in preserving middle class employments, he will tax the importations from countries paying their employees/workers at slave wages and he will slash taxes to employers that hire people.

    The words need to be followed by actions.

  8. #28
    Quote Originally Posted by Natural Elements View Post

    The stock market isn't an indicator of recovery, international investors could put more money in stocks, it doesn't mean that the economy is doing better, particularly when the economy is supported at 70% by comsuption.
    If the stock market isn't an indicator (which I do agree), then what is? The gold index?

    au3650nyb.gif
    If that is the case, then things are not looking great. Especially considering that (from what I understand), the buying power of gold has not changed in those 10 years.

    James Turk-Gold’s purchasing power in terms of oil - Video Dailymotion
    I am also a writer for Serpholic Media. You can find some of my articles here: Serpholic Media Blog

  9. #29
    Quote Originally Posted by Mike Dammann View Post
    If the stock market isn't an indicator (which I do agree), then what is? The gold index?
    I think the real economic indicator to watch is the job market. The economy will not recover until more people start working, which drives consumer spending and taxes, which further drives the job market. The problem is that for most months over the past few years, more people have dropped out of the job market than those who have found jobs. There are over 5.5 million fewer jobs today than when Obama took office. There are several numbers that the politicians watch regarding the job market. The U3 number is the number touted, but that number has been heavily manipulated over the past few years due to the number of people who have either stopped looking or have been forced to find part-time jobs at Wal-mart. Those people are quickly pulled out of the U3 calculation, which makes the job market look much better than it really is.

    Here are the real government numbers. The U6 number is 14.3%. That is the number that needs to come down.

    http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t15.htm


    If that is the case, then things are not looking great. Especially considering that (from what I understand), the buying power of gold has not changed in those 10 years.
    If you would have purchased gold in 1980, you would have lost money in real dollars by holding it until today due to inflation and dollar devaluation that exceeds the increases in gold prices. The gains over the last 10 years have been an anomaly for gold prices. it has been artificially driven high by the gold hucksters using scare tactics and false claims. The only reason they focus on 10 years is because their claims do not hold water if you go back 20 years or 30 years, during which gold prices have crashed several times.

  10. #30
    Believe it or not, actually the real economists base their indicator on paper manufacturing, which give the trend of consumption indicator, a main factor in economy.
    Very interesting and I didn't know that. What are the current indications based on paper manufacturing? Do you know?




    LOL, I think Ron Paul said that: "A romain clothe would cost in gold the same as a suit today", so the gold kept its buying power from milenia.
    I have heard similar analogies before but wasn't exactly sure if they were 100%. It seems that indeed, it's probably the case.
    I am also a writer for Serpholic Media. You can find some of my articles here: Serpholic Media Blog

Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •