which I assume most of you with facebook accounts have:



So I guess my question is: is this a problem or just the way things are? If it is a problem, is it somebody's fault and what can we do to fix it?

_________________
Tanzania¹²

I don't think it's a problem but those who do can just delete their accounts.

_________________
"Some people here have been groomed to accept mediocrity and lame ducks, I'm on board with the vibrato!" -SouthSoundHawk

Is this a problem? Ask everyone living paycheck to paycheck that still line up to see the latest movies, just HAVE to go to that Justin Beiber concert, wear designer jeans, and replace their iPhone with the most current version the second it comes out. Or those that get drunk on Natty Ice because that's the only thing they can afford, while watching $120 million dollar Flacco win the Super Bowl. Etc.

Face it, we're a nation of a few carefully curated hits, bestsellers, superstars, and high rollers supported by the same masses who cry they don't have any money and then expect the government to bail them out. Yes, it is a problem, but it's one society has created all on its own, and it's been created by the very people who think it isn't fair distributing their money up that food chain.

_________________
I blog, I tweet. When I'm not writing or goofing around on Seahawks.NET.

Is there a problem there? Sure there is. The thing is complete skewing of information to fit an agenda. Seriously, does anyone think there will be fewer poor people if you distribute the money more "evenly"? Nope. What people tend to ignore, is the fact that the poverty level increases with wealth. The more money the people at the bottom have, the more stuff is going to cost. His ideal doesn't make the poor any better off.

He then goes on to compare a CEO salary to the average salary and asks if it's fair. Of course it's fair. People may have salaries based on an hourly wage, but salary is not always determined by how hard you work or by how long you work, but by how much that work is valued to the company for which you work. You will never earn more than the company feels your job is worth, and that includes the CEO. Anyone who makes more than the value of their job will soon find themselves out of work.

Interesting side, I've seen a sort of "leveling the playing field" with the recent surge of self-publishing. Traditional methods created a system where many queried, only a select group were published, and of those, only a very select few were publicized and pushed to become bestsellers. With the surge of self-publishing, especially Amazon's system, any old Joe Schmo off the street can put out a book with little (if any) investment of time, effort, or money. Yes, there are some who have their work carefully edited, proofed, and fitted with a great cover, but the vehicle remains available for anyone and everyone, however they wish.

What has that does, that great equalizing effort? That transformation that allows everyone a shot at publishing, avoiding the traditional steps otherwise required to make it big? A couple of mega-hits exploded onto the scene, namely the Twilight series and 50 Shades of Grey (and all the subsequent parodies). And the rest of it all sits the same as it ever was, unseen by the majority of eyes.

No matter if there's a system that attempts to equalize everyone's attempts at success, the end result is the same. A majority of largely unsuccessful masses, a handful of mildly successful folks, and a couple of superstars.

_________________
I blog, I tweet. When I'm not writing or goofing around on Seahawks.NET.

I heard cutting taxes and making the wealthy, wealthier and make the 47% pay up will help fix this issue.

But the fact that this is a trend that's only getting worst by the year, it is definitely a problem and is definitely the reason why the economy is currently in shambles. People dont have enough money to spend.

I don't give a shit about income inequality. It's inevitable in a system that allows anyone to succeed.

What SHOULDN'T happen is that 80% be unable to receive the basics so that they have a chance to become one of the top 20%.

Power inequality is also a huge problem right now. Which is why I'm for regulations and "big" government. At least I feel like the government I elect works for me and not just for those very very very very very very very very wealthy that create their own (or more likely get rid of) regulations.

_________________
RIP ROAD WOES 12/2/2012

See, this is the complete opposite of how I feel. The government might give the APPEARANCE of working 'for the people', but I don't think for a minute that they're working for anyone but themselves. All the public does is give them votes. Huge companies give them money and also votes. They prefer the huge companies. Don't kid yourself, no-one in Washington gives a shit about you or your quality of life, they just care about maintaining the status quo so that they can have it made.

_________________
FrankerZ FrankerZ FrankerZ FrankerZ FrankerZ FrankerZ FrankerZ FrankerZ

Man, they are good to be able to make you feel that way. or you are just a tad gullible.

_________________
That's weak sauce!

As opposed to just the wealthiest with absolutely no control? I think I'll take government over that any day.

But it's cool that you think that people are just going to be responsible on their own (I'm the gullible one).

_________________
RIP ROAD WOES 12/2/2012

You'll take the government that has fooled you into believing they work for "you".

I don't think that all people/business/individuals are going to be responsible on their own, but I am responsible for figuring out who is not and then not dealing with them in any way.

There are irresponsible people out there, but there are plenty of responsible ones as well.

_________________
That's weak sauce!

Remember the size of our government back when things were far more equal? Well, inequality is growing, and so is the government. But no, they're not related at all.

_________________
I blog, I tweet. When I'm not writing or goofing around on Seahawks.NET.

Remember what inequality was like prior to us landing on the moon? Maybe we shouldn't have gone to the moon!

Just because it's your rallying point to talk about "big" government doesn't mean it means a damn thing. Wouldn't "bigger" government mean closer to socialism which would considerably bring down the share that the super rich have? It doesn't make any sense that you align the size of government (which has grown at a moderate pace since 1950) with inequality. Income inequality has skyrocketed in the past 10-20 years and it has nothing to do with the government getting "big". In fact, I would say that income inequality has occurred since regulations are constantly being either ignored, removed or not created because of it "strangling" a business.

Congratulations on calling something blue because it's the only color you know.

_________________
RIP ROAD WOES 12/2/2012

With disparity like that, it's no surprise the economy sucks. People can't buy houses and cars and restaurant dinners when there's no cash.

Is the only difference between the cash distribution of the US and the USSR the fact the poor still have enough to buy bread?

_________________
My single greatest contribution to the board: "42-13" (formerly 24-14)

Ew! Can we, like, not talk about poor people?

_________________
Tanzania¹²

Careful. Last time I went here, Vol accused me of painting with broad strokes or something.

_________________
GO HAWKS!!!

Visit my Seahawks blog at 17power.blogspot.com!

Follow me on Twitter at @17power

I stand by that. Sailor's doing it, too.

_________________


Okay, so maybe that pass rush is still an issue. Lather, rinse, repeat.

Everybody here does it.

_________________
Tanzania¹²

Well, whatever's more convenient for your worldview. I don't see how you can look around and NOT see these things.

_________________
GO HAWKS!!!

Visit my Seahawks blog at 17power.blogspot.com!

Follow me on Twitter at @17power

I am not painting with broad strokes. I am not suggesting all those with below middle class income do this. I'm saying there is a huge amount of people who do this because a huge amount of money flows up from the masses to those very few at the top. This is evident by a simple glance at the dynamics of Hollywood, bestselling books, music, whatever. It's not an indictment on poor people or their choices in life. It's a simple fact that by the dynamics of our society, money flows in huge amounts from the very poor to the very rich at the volition of those at the bottom, not the top. It's driven by the demand of those at the bottom, not the greed of those at the top.

_________________
I blog, I tweet. When I'm not writing or goofing around on Seahawks.NET.