bush_cheney2004 Posted November 10, 2011 Report Posted November 10, 2011 (edited) Oh tricked alright ... You show me your stats. I already showed you mine, but here it is again. It's a bit hard to see, but there's one line that's a shooting star - the growth of the wealthiEST 1% - and a bunch of other lines hovering around zero - the other 99% of us. No way Sister....my growth in wealth has not been ZERO or anywhere near ZERO. I'm a real American, not hijacked American data. Edited November 10, 2011 by bush_cheney2004 Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
blueblood Posted November 10, 2011 Report Posted November 10, 2011 Oh tricked alright ... You show me your stats. I already showed you mine, but here it is again. It's a bit hard to see, but there's one line that's a shooting star - the growth of the wealthiEST 1% - and a bunch of other lines hovering around zero - the other 99% of us. It's really quite clear. And it's about wealth, not income. And if you have to wonder whether you're a 1%'r ... ?You're not. You're just tricked. Refer to the gilded age. Highest Period of economic expansion in the USA. And yes I am a 1 per center. That line that's a shooting star is what happens when you save your money and have a succession plan instead of blowing your money on consumption. I live in a small house built in the 30s because dropping 6 figures on a new house is preposterous. I drive a truck that's a couple of years old because buying a brand new vehicle loses a lot of it's value in the first couple years. Hell the banker lives in the trailer court in my town. People need to smarten up. Quote "Stop the Madness!!!" - Kevin O'Leary "Money is the ultimate scorecard of life!". - Kevin O'Leary Economic Left/Right: 4.00 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -0.77
jacee Posted November 10, 2011 Author Report Posted November 10, 2011 (edited) The threshold to be a 1%er in Canada is only a couple hundred thousand? Does that include all forms of household income? Wow!!! Bitch’n……..I just yelled to my wife we’re 1%ers!!!……Her response, why do we live in Coquitlam and not the British Properties? I suppose the real “fat cats” in Canada are only the .05%ers or maybe the .25%ers………And all this time I thought we were just the 1%ers bootlickers….. Don't worry, you are. Edited November 10, 2011 by jacee Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted November 10, 2011 Report Posted November 10, 2011 I still can't believe it....the top 1% in Canada only earns about $200,000....CDN! That's a lot less than one would expect. It was only $181,000 CDN in 2007 according to this CTV.ca story: http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/Canada/20070924/statscan_earners_070924/ The top 5% is only $89,000 CDN. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
jacee Posted November 10, 2011 Author Report Posted November 10, 2011 (edited) Refer to the gilded age. Highest Period of economic expansion in the USA. And yes I am a 1 per center. That line that's a shooting star is what happens when you save your money and have a succession plan instead of blowing your money on consumption. I live in a small house built in the 30s because dropping 6 figures on a new house is preposterous. I drive a truck that's a couple of years old because buying a brand new vehicle loses a lot of it's value in the first couple years. Hell the banker lives in the trailer court in my town. People need to smarten up. About those stats ... you know ... All we need is stats, a the stats show that the closer we are to free enterprise, the more society prospers. Show us how "society" benefits ... when the data shows that we haven't since 1979. ONLY the 1% has benefited so far ... What have you got? Edited November 10, 2011 by jacee Quote
blueblood Posted November 10, 2011 Report Posted November 10, 2011 I still can't believe it....the top 1% in Canada only earns about $200,000....CDN! That's a lot less than one would expect. It was only $181,000 CDN in 2007 according to this CTV.ca story: http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/Canada/20070924/statscan_earners_070924/ The top 5% is only $89,000 CDN. Why don't those buffoons writing the article state if it's after tax or not. Grrrrrrrrrr!!! Quote "Stop the Madness!!!" - Kevin O'Leary "Money is the ultimate scorecard of life!". - Kevin O'Leary Economic Left/Right: 4.00 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -0.77
bush_cheney2004 Posted November 10, 2011 Report Posted November 10, 2011 ...What have you got? Where do you think your "free" healthcare comes from? Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
bush_cheney2004 Posted November 10, 2011 Report Posted November 10, 2011 Why don't those buffoons writing the article state if it's after tax or not. Grrrrrrrrrr!!! I don't know....but that isn't very much in the grand scheme of things. That's relative peanuts! Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
blueblood Posted November 10, 2011 Report Posted November 10, 2011 About those stats ... you know ... All we need is stats, a the stats show that the closer we are to free enterprise, the more society prospers. Show us how "society" benefits ... when the data shows that we haven't since 1979. ONLY the 1% has benefited so far ... What have you got? The gilded age had zero income taxes and low gov't spending. At the same time people turned from being farm laborers to creating the middle class. That's an example from history, and why we don't follow it I don't know. Read august1991's post on what modern day consumers have vs what they did long ago and vs the rest of the world. An iPad computer is less than a thousand dollars, a computer in the 1950s was unattainable. That's how society benefits. Quote "Stop the Madness!!!" - Kevin O'Leary "Money is the ultimate scorecard of life!". - Kevin O'Leary Economic Left/Right: 4.00 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -0.77
blueblood Posted November 10, 2011 Report Posted November 10, 2011 I don't know....but that isn't very much in the grand scheme of things. That's relative peanuts! I know it's peanuts. My fertilizer bill is enough to easily put somebody in the top 5%. Quote "Stop the Madness!!!" - Kevin O'Leary "Money is the ultimate scorecard of life!". - Kevin O'Leary Economic Left/Right: 4.00 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -0.77
bush_cheney2004 Posted November 10, 2011 Report Posted November 10, 2011 (edited) I know it's peanuts. My fertilizer bill is enough to easily put somebody in the top 5%. The CNN Money numbers for US income is stated as AGI - Adjusted Gross Income (1% = $346,000 for 2009). I remember telling my wife that we were in the top 5% of US household incomes and she did not believe me. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Household_income_in_the_United_States Edited November 10, 2011 by bush_cheney2004 Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
jacee Posted November 10, 2011 Author Report Posted November 10, 2011 (edited) They're talking income when the issue is wealth. They're talking medians (Canada) vs. averages (US), which can't be compared (averages are inflated). In Canada, you're a 1%'r if you've accumulated Net Worth of $17.5m or more. Edited November 10, 2011 by jacee Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted November 10, 2011 Report Posted November 10, 2011 In Canada, you're a 1%'r if you've accumulated Net Worth of $175m or more. Data please.....and not American data! Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
Bonam Posted November 10, 2011 Report Posted November 10, 2011 (edited) They're talking income when the issue is wealth. They're talking medians (Canada) vs. averages (US), which can't be compared (averages are inflated). In Canada, you're a 1%'r if you've accumulated Net Worth of $175m or more. You're saying that ~35,000 Canadians hold (much) more than $5 trillion in wealth. Considering that the total value of all wealth in Canada is less than $5 trillion, I find that mathematically impossible. Much like many of your other statements, this assertion is a blatant lie. Edited November 10, 2011 by Bonam Quote
Guest Derek L Posted November 10, 2011 Report Posted November 10, 2011 You're saying that ~35,000 Canadians hold (much) more than $5 trillion in wealth. Considering that the total value of all wealth in Canada is less than $5 trillion, I find that mathematically impossible. Much like many of your other statements, this assertion is a blatant lie. That’s because we (I can say that now thanks to BC!!!) have it “hidden” in secret banks Quote
jacee Posted November 10, 2011 Author Report Posted November 10, 2011 You're saying that ~35,000 Canadians hold (much) more than $5 trillion in wealth. Considering that the total value of all wealth in Canada is less than $5 trillion, I find that mathematically impossible. Much like many of your other statements, this assertion is a blatant lie. You wish! But it didn't look right to me either... Decimal place corrected now ... In Canada you're a 1%'r household if you have net worth of $17.5m or more. Quote
blueblood Posted November 10, 2011 Report Posted November 10, 2011 You're saying that ~35,000 Canadians hold (much) more than $5 trillion in wealth. Considering that the total value of all wealth in Canada is less than $5 trillion, I find that mathematically impossible. Much like many of your other statements, this assertion is a blatant lie. Um you forgot a zero on that there 35,000. 1% of 35 million is 350,000. Which makes jacees claim even more ridiculous. Quote "Stop the Madness!!!" - Kevin O'Leary "Money is the ultimate scorecard of life!". - Kevin O'Leary Economic Left/Right: 4.00 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -0.77
blueblood Posted November 10, 2011 Report Posted November 10, 2011 You wish! But it didn't look right to me either... Decimal place corrected now ... In Canada you're a 1%'r household if you have net worth of $17.5m or more. 350,000*17,500,000= 6,125,000,000,000 what's that twitter saying, ahh #fail Quote "Stop the Madness!!!" - Kevin O'Leary "Money is the ultimate scorecard of life!". - Kevin O'Leary Economic Left/Right: 4.00 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -0.77
Bonam Posted November 10, 2011 Report Posted November 10, 2011 (edited) Um you forgot a zero on that there 35,000. 1% of 35 million is 350,000. Which makes jacees claim even more ridiculous. Thanks, silly mistake on my part. That makes it ridiculous even with jacee's 17.5 million "revision" to the made up data. Let me guess, jacee's next revision down will be to 1.75 million? Which is like anyone with a house in Vancouver? Those bastardly 1%ers, how dare they have a house in a Canadian city. Edited November 10, 2011 by Bonam Quote
Guest Derek L Posted November 10, 2011 Report Posted November 10, 2011 Thanks, silly mistake on my part. That makes it ridiculous even with jacee's 17.5 million "revision" to the made up data. Let me guess, jacee's next revision down will be to 1.75 million? Which is like anyone with a house in Vancouver? Those bastardly 1%ers, how dare they have a house in a Canadian city. I was worried for a second………I thought I was no longer a 1%er……..So what you’re saying Bonam, all of us homeowners in Greater Vancouver are either 1%ers or close to it? No wonder they think we’re hording all the wealth…….they’re sleeping in tents……….. So this is really turning into a debate against homeowners? Quote
jacee Posted November 10, 2011 Author Report Posted November 10, 2011 (edited) Um you forgot a zero on that there 35,000. 1% of 35 million is 350,000. Which makes jacees claim even more ridiculous. Your claim that children are tax filers is ridiculous. There were 11.5m Canadian households filing taxes in 2005, 1% of them is 115,000 1%'r households with net worth of $17.5m or more. Edited November 10, 2011 by jacee Quote
blueblood Posted November 10, 2011 Report Posted November 10, 2011 Your claim that children are tax filers is ridiculous. There were 11.5m Canadian households filing taxes in 2005, 1% of them is 115,000 1%'r households with net worth of $17.5m or more. Holy move the goalposts. First it's 1% of Canadians, now it's 1% of households, what next 1% of Canadians with jobs? Ctv says that I'm in the 1%, and I'll go with that over jacees arbitrary figures pulled from the sky. And no citation with it. Throw down your called. Quote "Stop the Madness!!!" - Kevin O'Leary "Money is the ultimate scorecard of life!". - Kevin O'Leary Economic Left/Right: 4.00 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -0.77
jacee Posted November 10, 2011 Author Report Posted November 10, 2011 Holy move the goalposts. First it's 1% of Canadians, now it's 1% of households, what next 1% of Canadians with jobs? Ctv says that I'm in the 1%, and I'll go with that over jacees arbitrary figures pulled from the sky. And no citation with it. Throw down your called. It's how statscan presents it, and it makes sense. 115,000 households share 40% of the wealth of Canada, about $2t out of $5t total. Quote
jacee Posted November 10, 2011 Author Report Posted November 10, 2011 Thanks, silly mistake on my part. That makes it ridiculous even with jacee's 17.5 million "revision" to the made up data. Let me guess, jacee's next revision down will be to 1.75 million? Which is like anyone with a house in Vancouver? Those bastardly 1%ers, how dare they have a house in a Canadian city. Bad calculator ... not enough 0's. Using my phone now. But I think we're good now as the totals make sense. Quote
blueblood Posted November 10, 2011 Report Posted November 10, 2011 It's how statscan presents it, and it makes sense. 115,000 households share 40% of the wealth of Canada, about $2t out of $5t total. And the ctv article uses stats Canada info. Also in the media that is the metric they are talking about, move goalposts much. Heck they were mostly complaining about the rise in gaps of income on CNN. Quote "Stop the Madness!!!" - Kevin O'Leary "Money is the ultimate scorecard of life!". - Kevin O'Leary Economic Left/Right: 4.00 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -0.77
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.