Income growth of 1% vs 99%

[GostHacked]

Actually it did cost a bit of labour. The writing doesn't just appear by itself.

Well then give yourself a pat on the back and tell your boss I told you to take the rest of the day off. You must be exhausted.

[Shady]

Well then give yourself a pat on the back and tell your boss I told you to take the rest of the day off. You must be exhausted.

Sweet! I'm gonna tell him tomorrow and give him the link to the forum in case he has any follow up questions.

Somebody's leaving work early today!!!

Edited November 8, 2011 by Shady

[dre]

That doesn't tell us anything. What's the breakdown ? Why are the 1% doing so much better ?

Because the 1% are smart and resourcefull. They understand how the system works, and they know how to get government to tilt the playing field in their favor. Theyre hiring professional lobbiests, and greasing all kinds of political palms, instead of "occupying" a park somewhere. They have successfully cut the top tax bracket in half over the last few decades, and they have gotten the government to set up scams that tax investment at a lower rate than wage income.

But the biggest factor is our monetary/financial system. Its designed from the ground up to move money into the pockets of that 1%. The monetary system as is, is basically a TAX that all the producers in the economy have to pay to that top 1%.

In Canada they steal about 3500 dollars per year for each and every tax payer.

And when the government borrows money they pay interest to private banks, EVEN THOUGH the government are the ones that back the currency. Ever ask yourself why the government which controls the mint and the treasury pays interest to private bankers for the governments own freshly created dollars? Imagine for a second, the cost of that.

Do you see how this creates a massive trickle up effect?

The following figures for 1996 are from the Bank of Canada Review, Spring 1997, and Statistics Canada. In 1996 the GDP (gross domestic product) was $797.8 billion. The federal debt was $469.4 billion or 58.1 percent of the GDP. Interest payments on the federal debt—mostly financed with interest-bearing bank created money (BCM) rather than interest-free government created money (GCM)—amounted to $45.3 billion. The interest on the 6.7 percent of the federal debt held by The Bank of Canada and other government agencies flows back to government on our behalf. The approximately $42.2 billion in interest on the remaining 93.2 percent of the federal debt held by private banks and other members of the financial elite, domestic and foreign, is basically a subsidy to the wealthy. For reasons that have nothing to do with economic sense and everything to do with the fact that money buys political influence our government taxes ordinary citizens to pay for that subsidy. Assuming 15 million taxpayers (children and poor people don’t pay taxes) we divide $42.2 billion of interest by 15 million and get an average of $2813 per taxpayer. But when you add provincial and other public debt to the federal debt you get a total of approximately $650 billion. So let’s say about $3500 per taxpayer.

They have been running this scam for 38 years now, and in that last 38 years we have grown our money supply by about 100 times much as in the entire history of our country before that. And for every single dollar in monetary expansion the 1% has had about 5 cents given to them as a gift... FOR NOTHING.

If you put this system in a simulator and run it for long enough the 1% will own absolutely every bit of money, and they will own all the real property too. Thats a mathematical certainty based on how the system is designed.

Edited November 9, 2011 by dre

[jacee]

Because the 1% are smart and resourcefull. They understand how the system works, and they know how to get government to tilt the playing field in their favor. Theyre hiring professional lobbiests, and greasing all kinds of political palms, instead of "occupying" a park somewhere. They have successfully cut the top tax bracket in half over the last few decades, and they have gotten the government to set up scams that tax investment at a lower rate than wage income.

But the biggest factor is our monetary/financial system. Its designed from the ground up to move money into the pockets of that 1%. The monetary system as is, is basically a TAX that all the producers in the economy have to pay to that top 1%.

In Canada they steal about 3500 dollars per year for each and every tax payer.

And when the government borrows money they pay interest to private banks, EVEN THOUGH the government are the ones that back the currency. Ever ask yourself why the government which controls the mint and the treasury pays interest to private bankers for the governments own freshly created dollars? Imagine for a second, the cost of that.

Do you see how this creates a massive trickle up effect?

They have been running this scam for 38 years now, and in that last 38 years we have grown our money supply by about 100 times much as in the entire history of our country before that. And for every single dollar in monetary expansion the 1% has had about 5 cents given to them as a gift... FOR NOTHING.

If you put this system in a simulator and run it for long enough the 1% will own absolutely every bit of money, and they will own all the real property too. Thats a mathematical certainty based on how the system is designed.

Dre, this is really good information. Thanks.

It's clear to me that the constantly increasing share of wealth held by the top 1% will eventually leave the rest of us with nothing and is thus an entirely unsustainable system.

I'm just not sure specifically what we should be doing about it ... though I think the OCCUPY protest is a start.

[dre]

Dre, this is really good information. Thanks.

It's clear to me that the constantly increasing share of wealth held by the top 1% will eventually leave the rest of us with nothing and is thus an entirely unsustainable system.

I'm just not sure specifically what we should be doing about it ... though I think the OCCUPY protest is a start.

[bush_cheney2004]

...It's clear to me that the constantly increasing share of wealth held by the top 1% will eventually leave the rest of us with nothing and is thus an entirely unsustainable system.

Oh no...it's worse than that in this make believe story. Even the 1% lose all their wealth and property to an even smaller 0.1%, then 0.01%...then 0.001%...then 0.0001%...then 0.00001%...then 0.000001%...then 0.0000001%....and on and on until we get to just one person owning everything in whole damn world! And he.she lived happily ever after!

[cybercoma]

Fareed Zakaria posted this on his GPS blog: Income growth

I've seen this in stat form, but it's more vivid seen in a graph. The 1% grow widely while the 99% almost stagnate after 30 years? Some disparity is expected but this is ridiculous. And this is after-tax income growth.

Also interesting is the big income spikes for the 1% before the 2000 and 2008 bubble popped. Showing here who is benefiting from - and who may, for obvious reasons, be significantly driving the causation of - these bubbles.

Ye who have drank the 1%'s Kool-Aid, who defend their individual liberties in a twisted conception of human rights, how shall ye apologize for them now?

And ultimately it's not even about income, but financial wealth. When your income is stagnate for 30 years, you're blocked from investing and growing your financial wealth. Meanwhile, the top 1%....

[blueblood]

Because the 1% are smart and resourcefull. They understand how the system works, and they know how to get government to tilt the playing field in their favor. Theyre hiring professional lobbiests, and greasing all kinds of political palms, instead of "occupying" a park somewhere. They have successfully cut the top tax bracket in half over the last few decades, and they have gotten the government to set up scams that tax investment at a lower rate than wage income.

But the biggest factor is our monetary/financial system. Its designed from the ground up to move money into the pockets of that 1%. The monetary system as is, is basically a TAX that all the producers in the economy have to pay to that top 1%.

In Canada they steal about 3500 dollars per year for each and every tax payer.

And when the government borrows money they pay interest to private banks, EVEN THOUGH the government are the ones that back the currency. Ever ask yourself why the government which controls the mint and the treasury pays interest to private bankers for the governments own freshly created dollars? Imagine for a second, the cost of that.

Do you see how this creates a massive trickle up effect?

They have been running this scam for 38 years now, and in that last 38 years we have grown our money supply by about 100 times much as in the entire history of our country before that. And for every single dollar in monetary expansion the 1% has had about 5 cents given to them as a gift... FOR NOTHING.

If you put this system in a simulator and run it for long enough the 1% will own absolutely every bit of money, and they will own all the real property too. Thats a mathematical certainty based on how the system is designed.

That's what happened when Trudeau the hippie tried to copy socialism. Fire up the printing press and spend spend spend. How else was he supposed to get money for his nonsense, the money tree? Time to crack up the rates and save money, and cut spending. Private banks were the only people to borrow from because of the income they receive from loans on production. Blame th 99% for their wannabe lifestyle and living on debt and voting in politicians who spend on programs.

People did better in the earlier days because they had a debt is the devil mentality and paid their bills, not because of "the system". Banking has existed for hundreds of years and gives us the standard of living we enjoy. There's no conspiracy, no shadow games, just business.

[blueblood]

Dp

Edited November 9, 2011 by blueblood

[blueblood]

Dp

[cybercoma]

Here's an article with a crapload of economic data.

http://www.munknee.com/2011/07/wheres-the-moral-outrage-regarding-financial-situation-in-america/

Below are 10 facts about the financial condition of American families that will blow your mind:

1.Only 58% have a job

2.Only 56% are currently covered by employer-provided health insurance

3.The median yearly wage is $26,261

4.The average household debt is $75,600

5.Only 5% of households have earned enough additional income to match the rise in housing costs since 1975

6.Families are approximately $7.7 trillion poorer than they were back in early 2007

7.The poorest 50% now own just 2.5% of all the wealth in the United States

8.Approximately 21% of all children in the United States were living below the poverty line in 2010

9.More than 44 million are living on food stamps, and nearly half of them are children

10.Close to 20% of all men between the ages of 25 and 54 do not have a job

Chart headings:

1. The gap between the top 0.01% and everyone else hasn’t been this big since the Roaring Twenties

2. Half of America owns 2.5% of country’s wealth. The top 1% owns a third of it.

3. Half of America owns only 0.5% of America’s stocks and bonds. The top 1% owns more than 50%!

This third point is important because many would have you believe that the increase in stock prices is wonderful because it grows the working class's retirement funds. Meanwhile, in reality the top 1% own more than half the stocks, while the bottom 90% own less than 10% of all the stocks, bonds, and mutual funds.

4. The wealth gap has spread dramatically in the past 20 years!

5. The disparity in pay of the average CEO and both that of the average production worker and the Federal minimum wage has expoded over the past two decades

6. Real average earnings have not increased in 50 years – that’s HALF A CENTURY!

7. Savings rates have declined since 1982 as Americans borrow money to keep up although they’re rising now.

8. Poor Americans have a SLIM CHANCE of rising to the upper middle class despite the myth of social mobility

9. The wealth gap has been significantly increased by Republican tax cuts.

10. Income taxes keeps getting lower and lower for the rich.

Occupy doesn't really know what it's protesting though...

[bush_cheney2004]

....Occupy doesn't really know what it's protesting though...

Some of that data doesn't hold up to closer scrutiny.

[cybercoma]

Whatever you say.

[bush_cheney2004]

Whatever you say.

Well, at least you are still focused on America....that's what counts around here!

[dre]

That's what happened when Trudeau the hippie tried to copy socialism. Fire up the printing press and spend spend spend. How else was he supposed to get money for his nonsense, the money tree? Time to crack up the rates and save money, and cut spending. Private banks were the only people to borrow from because of the income they receive from loans on production. Blame th 99% for their wannabe lifestyle and living on debt and voting in politicians who spend on programs.

People did better in the earlier days because they had a debt is the devil mentality and paid their bills, not because of "the system". Banking has existed for hundreds of years and gives us the standard of living we enjoy. There's no conspiracy, no shadow games, just business.

Private banks were the only people to borrow from because of the income they receive from loans on production.

I already told you that the banks dont lend based on their income or assets. They create money out of thin air based on your promise to pay. A government could simply print its own interest free money at the treasury. The result is identical (monetary expansion). The only difference is they wouldnt pay interest.

You have literally zero understanding of how the system works. Iv tried to help you figure it out... linked you to some really good material, including material from the reserve banking system itself that explains this stuff. You just completely ignore it. Willfull ignorance, plain and simple.

Banking has existed for hundreds of years and gives us the standard of living we enjoy.

No your absolutely and utterly wrong. Our current financial system is not even 39 years old. A federal reserve system based on fiat currency is a BRAND NEW SYSTEM.

Yes, theres been BANKING for 100's of years but traditional banks loaned out money that was deposited in them. That is NOT how banks work today.

Did you bother reading or watching any of the material Iv linked you to?

Edited November 9, 2011 by dre

[bush_cheney2004]

...Yes, theres been BANKING for 100's of years but traditional banks loaned out money that was deposited in them. That is NOT how banks work today.

This is patently false...enough of your fabricated nonsense. Fractional banking began hundreds of years ago with goldsmith notes...what a bunch of crap. Florentine banks "created wealth" with the float before that.

http://wakeupfromyourslumber.blogspot.com/2005/12/origins-of-fractional-reserve-banking.html

Edited November 9, 2011 by bush_cheney2004

[blueblood]

Private banks were the only people to borrow from because of the income they receive from loans on production.

I already told you that the banks dont lend based on their income or assets. They create money out of thin air based on your promise to pay. A government could simply print its own interest free money at the treasury. The result is identical (monetary expansion). The only difference is they wouldnt pay interest.

You have literally zero understanding of how the system works. Iv tried to help you figure it out... linked you to some really good material, including material from the reserve banking system itself that explains this stuff. You just completely ignore it. Willfull ignorance, plain and simple.

No your absolutely and utterly wrong. Our current financial system is not even 39 years old. A federal reserve system based on fiat currency is a BRAND NEW SYSTEM.

Yes, theres been BANKING for 100's of years but traditional banks loaned out money that was deposited in them. That is NOT how banks work today.

Did you bother reading or watching any of the material Iv linked you to?

A gov't could simply print money at the treasury and not pay interest, just like 1920s Germany and Zimbabwe? How's that going?

Income isn't just cash, it's a promise to pay, and accounts receivable as well. That's what many people who invested in Lehman bros. Found out the hard way. What your doing is similar to Krugman's style economists, creating models and drawing conclusions to fit your beliefs.

And your once again focused on low interest rates and their effects. It does work the other way, there needs to be a fed chairman with a brain in his head.

[bush_cheney2004]

....Income isn't just cash, it's a promise to pay, and accounts receivable as well. That's what many people who invested in Lehman bros. Found out the hard way. What your doing is similar to Krugman's style economists, creating models and drawing conclusions to fit your beliefs.

Agreed....and what is not dumbed down, is just made up. It pre-supposes and outcome and re-engineers reality to bring about the expected result, when nothing could be further from the truth, if only because the status quo will undergo change from many directions.

[dre]

A gov't could simply print money at the treasury and not pay interest, just like 1920s Germany and Zimbabwe? How's that going?

Income isn't just cash, it's a promise to pay, and accounts receivable as well. That's what many people who invested in Lehman bros. Found out the hard way. What your doing is similar to Krugman's style economists, creating models and drawing conclusions to fit your beliefs.

And your once again focused on low interest rates and their effects. It does work the other way, there needs to be a fed chairman with a brain in his head.

It doesnt make any difference WHO runs the fed. The result has been the exact same for every single guy they have had in there since 1970. When you give someone the right to profit from inventing money out of thin air thats exactly what they are going to do and thats exactly what virtually every central bank in the modern world has done since 1971.

What your doing is similar to Krugman's style economists, creating models and drawing conclusions to fit your beliefs.

Im not creating ANY kind of model. I explained to you exactly how the system works, and why its not possible for new debt to not be created. I linked you not only to some really good material that explains these concepts (which you didnt even read and watch), but I showed you how the Federal Reserve itself describes what they do. I also showed you a few examples of how the basic math works, and those went right over your head as well.

Its really easy to understand why its impossible for this system to not accrue debt. It has nothing to do with who runs it, its simply the result of the mathematical rules of the system. It is mathematically impossible for there to EVER be enough currency in the system to repay all the debt. That means that the money supply (which IS debt) has to grow EVERY SINGLE YEAR. And thats exactly what it HAS done since 1971. Its also easy to look at a timeline and see exactly what happened to the money supply, and to debt after the gold window closed.

It took the US until 1973 to created its first trillion. That built the entire country. That last trillion dollars in monetary expansion happened in 5 months. The next trillion will be created in about 4 and 1/2 months.

This illustrates the results pretty nicely... Start it at 7:30.

A gov't could simply print money at the treasury and not pay interest, just like 1920s Germany and Zimbabwe? How's that going?

We are doing the exact same thing when we borrow the money from the central bank. THe result is simply monetary expansion. Like I keep telling you, the banks dont have the money they loan you. They create it out of thin air, just like the germans did.

We ARE doing what the Romans and Germans tried to do.

Edited November 9, 2011 by dre

[Moonlight Graham]

It's clear to me that the constantly increasing share of wealth held by the top 1% will eventually leave the rest of us with nothing and is thus an entirely unsustainable system.

Doubtful. The 1% need to appease the masses in order to peacefully maintain their wealth and power. Part of this means giving them just enough wealth and social benefits etc. to make them feel they have a decent standard of living and a chance to be upwardly mobile in income/wealth. If we were all dirt-poor the rich wouldn't last long.

We've been brainwashed by elites/government of this trickle-up economics bullcrap, that in terms of economic growth "a rising tide lifts all ships", when the numbers show very little "lift" for the masses and the 1% laughing all the to the banks that they own.

[Bonam]

It took the US until 1973 to created its first trillion. That built the entire country. That last trillion dollars in monetary expansion happened in 5 months. The next trillion will be created in about 4 and 1/2 months.

That in itself is meaningless. It is true of every exponential trend. It took from the dawn of time until 1800 to create the first billion people. The last billion only took about a decade. Economic growth, too, is exponential, and so one would expect the money supply to increase exponentially along with it. That would be true whether the debt burden was increasing along with this economic growth or not.

[dre]

That in itself is meaningless. It is true of every exponential trend. It took from the dawn of time until 1800 to create the first billion people. The last billion only took about a decade. Economic growth, too, is exponential, and so one would expect the money supply to increase exponentially along with it. That would be true whether the debt burden was increasing along with this economic growth or not.

No sorry thats wrong. Youre assuming that the money supply increased because of economic growth but since the fractional fiat system has been in place debt growth has vastly outpaced economic growth. For the first 200 years of Americas existance the purchasing power of the dollar didnt even move more than about 2%, and the money supply grew relatively slowly. And this was during a time of fast economic growth. Some of the fastest growth ever.

But youre right about one thing. The accumulation of debt IS an exponential trend. And the reason for that is simple... since debt can only be serviced from the general money supply, and since the general money supply is created almost completely out of bank credit, and since when the bank creates credit only the principle goes into the money supply... every single year new debt has to be created AT LEAST in the ammount required to to service the interest on existing loans.

Its possible for on actor in the system to pay down there debt, or even a few of them. But due to the fundamental rules of the system itself its a GUARANTEED FACT that the overall debt of all participants in the system will grow.

Heres an example with some Canadian data.

In 1999 bank credit amounted to $557 billion, almost 95 percent of our money supply. Real interest (i.e. nominal interest minus inflation) on this bank credit was at least 5 percent, or $28 billion. But where is this interest to come from since banks create credit, but not the interest they charge on that credit? It can’t come from the approximately $32 billion in cash (GCM) that circulates in public hands. It can only come from more bank credit with more interest attached. But for all existing bank credit to be paid without anyone defaulting on their loans, the economy must expand by 2.9 percent ($28 billion of interest divided by the GDP, $953 billion). Since the average annual real GDP growth from 1960 to 1995 was only 2.3 percent, the economy is going to repeatedly stumble in its effort to keep up with the interest payments on all that bank credit. This is the root cause of what is known as the business cycle, and there’s nothing inevitable about it.

Now go back to the example I showed you before and follow it through carefully....

http://www.yesmagazine.org/issues/the-new-economy/how-banks-make-money.

Theres $171 dollars in the money supply (general economy) after step 5, that Susie and Joe have a chance to trade their goods and services for. The problem is between the both of them they owe 178 dollars. The only way they can ever repay their loans is if a new layer is added to the pyramid, and theres an every increasing ammount of borrowers and debt.

This should help you understand it as well.

FACT: Each year all outstanding debt must compound by at least the interest on that debt.

FACT: The ammount of debt in the system will ALWAYS exceed the available of dollars in the economy to repay it.

Some people have called this a ponzi scheme buts not. In a ponzi scheme the people that get into the system the latest are the ones that lose. But in this schema all holders of currency take the same losses. THe private federal reserve banks are essentially TAXING all producers in the economy, while providing nothing at all.

And if you dont want to take my word for it, then do a little research. Publications by the federal reserve will tell you the exact same thing.

[Bonam]

It can’t come from the approximately $32 billion in cash (GCM) that circulates in public hands. It can only come from more bank credit with more interest attached. But for all existing bank credit to be paid without anyone defaulting on their loans, the economy must expand by 2.9 percent ($28 billion of interest divided by the GDP, $953 billion). Since the average annual real GDP growth from 1960 to 1995 was only 2.3 percent, the economy is going to repeatedly stumble in its effort to keep up with the interest payments on all that bank credit.

So all it would take for this whole issue you've been harping on for the last couple weeks to be solved would be 0.6% faster average economic growth? Doesn't sound like a deep fundamental flaw in the system to me.

[dre]

So all it would take for this whole issue you've been harping on for the last couple weeks to be solved would be 0.6% faster average economic growth? Doesn't sound like a deep fundamental flaw in the system to me.

Not quite, because even if theres enough growth for the system to stay solvent the result is still perpetually and exponentially increasing debt and monetary expansion. Historically this does not end well. Theres also the problem that rapid monetary expansion creates large bubbles in the economy, and encourages overly risky behavior.

Its fundamental flaw is that its mathematically unsustainable. Its also morally fraudulent... theres simply no good or just reason to have a small group of wealthy men taking money from every participant in the economy, while providing nothing of value in exchange. Kinda like if you rented me your neighbors car while they were on vacation.

Edited November 9, 2011 by dre

[bush_cheney2004]

....We've been brainwashed by elites/government of this trickle-up economics bullcrap, that in terms of economic growth "a rising tide lifts all ships", when the numbers show very little "lift" for the masses and the 1% laughing all the to the banks that they own.

That's fine by me...I can ride the tide as long as it lasts and become an unemployed camper later. What's not to like about that? Life is good....

Hey, I wonder if tent sales are way up? Time to research some stocks!

Edited November 9, 2011 by bush_cheney2004