Some one-percenters are myopic too, though. Some don’t seem to see the degree to which they’ve been luckier than their less-fortunate fellow travelers to the grave. (Remember the line from “A Christmas Carol”?: “the only time I know of, in the long calendar of the year, when men and women seem by one consent to open their shut-up hearts freely, and to think of people below them as if they really were fellow-travelers to the grave, and not another race of creatures bound on other journeys.”)</p>
<p>As arrogant as it may be to presume the worst about the wealthiest, it’s no less arrogant to presume the worst about the poorest; or to presume that either great wealth or great poverty is always deserved.</p>
<p>The economy seems a bit better around here. People are shopping in droves - or middle-aged women are, anyway. It was just us in Kohl’s at 8 AM this morning. Where would the holiday season be without us? (You’re welcome, America.)</p>
<p>Sure expensive items CAN be donated or gifts, but not to the extent i see at the local food bank…not sure how some volunteers,who struggle in their own right, feel about this…</p>
<p>Kelsmom,not sure if some areas like Detroit EVER get back to standards of a generation ago,when an area relies solely on 1 industry, and the industry implodes, everything,including local economy,goes with it…Major cities with diverse job bases fair much better…</p>
<p>It is certain that Detroit will not get back to the standards of a generation ago. The new jobs coming into the area pay only a fraction of the jobs that were lost. This is an area that will see children worse off than their parents were. Certainly, this has happened throughout the history of our nation, so it is not a new phenomenon. It is sad, just the same.</p>
<p>I remain amazed, however, at the number of people who make blanket assumptions about “the poor.” I also am surprised at how many people think that because things are hunky dorey in their nice neighborhood that the rest of America is experiencing a similarly fine economy. As the divide between the top and bottom wage-earners increases, fewer will be happy with their lot in life … but those who are happy will be increasingly happier.</p>
<p>Kelsmom, i haven’t seen anyone express that if their local economy is fine, that the rest of the country must be doing likewise…Clearly some areas are doing better and others still trudging along…</p>
<p>“Perhaps you could provide a few quotes from this thread illustrating that people think that things are fine across the country.”</p>
<p>I was tempted to respond with Newt’s view of Occupy: “go get a job, after you take a bath.” (Clearly he thinks jobs are readily available, for Occupy folks at least.) Instead I’ll offer this piece:</p>
<p>“A recent analysis by Roll Call, the Capitol Hill newspaper, concludes that the net worth of members of Congress has increased 25 percent since 2008. No wonder they don’t understand the seriousness of the unemployment problem.”</p>
<p>^^So obviously a commentary made on Newt and the Congress, but you can’t possibly be attributing those statements to ones made by people on this thread. Little too much of a stretch.</p>
<p>“Shifting the burden from the 99 percent to the 1 percent is the surest and best way to get our consumer-based economy rolling again.”</p>
<p>Do you think it is mathematically possible to actually shift the burden from 99 percent for 1% to carry? Even if your new “reasonable” level was 90% or more, do you really think that the top 1% of income earners (many who are already paying 30-40%) can carry the burden for everybody else?</p>
<p>Alh, the article basically just quotes people who got their money from inheritance or the highly paid financial industry. No wonder they feel guilty about having too much, and they have the option to donate as much of their money as they choose. The majority of people in the 1% are not in that income level because it was given to them.</p>
<p>Now I don’t object to higher tax rates, if it is used to pay down the deficit and not as a political slush fund. And I sure don’t object to getting rid of the thousands of targeted deductions in the system, and people paying lower tax rates than those who earn it by working. But here’s a question for you, how much is enough? As many of the upper income earners are there because they are physicians or small business owners, working people…paying often more than 30% of their overall income in taxes, how much more would you consider enough? What exactly is the right number?</p>
<p>But I know they answer will always be some example of a billionaire paying less than his secretary or some other case that has nothing to do with the majority. I can never get a straight answer to this one.</p>
<p>30% of income taxed is too low a number…mathematically…Because government spending is a larger part of GDP.</p>
<p>Right now…in many states and large cities…government is close to 40% of the economy…I am not talking about NH. :)</p>
<p>Asking people who make 30,000 or less…to pay 40% of their income in taxes is a little problematic…since it is pretty hard to live on 18,000 a year or less…so…those that can afford to pay …probably have to pay a little more than 40% to make up the difference.</p>
<p>In normal times…35% might work. Right now the federal govt is about
25% of GDP…historically that number is closer to 20%. We can get to
20% again…but it is going to take some time. It takes time to work out the economic problems we have now.</p>
<p>So…if a top 1 per center is paying 30% in taxes…they aren’t paying enough…They are getting subsidized by the government.</p>
<p>These numbers are rough estimates…</p>
<p>The federal govt employs 600,000 fewer people than it did 3 years ago.</p>
<p>Paying taxes to shrink the deficit…in these economic times…is great economic policy if you want a smaller economy and fewer jobs.</p>
<p>Over the past three decades, the income gap between the wealthiest 1 percent and the poorest 40 percent has more than tripled. Over the past decade, the richest Americans have garnered every dollar of increase in national income. Ten percent of the population controls two thirds of national wealth.</p>
<p>How is it again that the supposed class warfare being waged is from the bottom up?</p>
<p>Pretty hard to conceptualize that, poetsheart.</p>
<p>I also find it amazing that some 1 percenters complain about the possibility of paying 12,000 to 20,000 in tax increases…If taxes are raised on those with taxable incomes…taxable incomes… not gross incomes …of 500,000. Others have lost jobs and have seen their incomes drop…30,000…40,000 70,000, 110,000 and more. Others have seen their pay go nowhere for 10 years…</p>
<p>There are people that are losing almost all their wealth…maybe all their wealth…well except for an iPhone…and a computer ot two…</p>
<p>These people should be the complainers…not the 1 percenters.</p>
<p>I find the complaining by the 1 percenters…well let me just say…my brain has a problem with that complaining…:)</p>
<p>“Now I don’t object to higher tax rates, if it is used to pay down the deficit and not as a political slush fund.”</p>
<p>AND</p>
<p>“In normal times…35% might work. Right now the federal govt is about
25% of GDP…historically that number is closer to 20%. We can get to
20% again…but it is going to take some time.”</p>
<p>Two perspectives saying the same thing. The “silver bullet” is the willingness to change, which is not a strength of our current political system environment. As a society we’re not going to get anywhere with single-issue “solutions” like (A) Increase taxes on the rich; or (B) Cut tax rates for 1-percenters and reduce social programs to offset reduced revenue.</p>
![http://images.johnmauldin.com/uploads/charts/120311-02.jpg[/url]](http://images.johnmauldin.com/uploads/charts/120311-02.jpg%5B/url%5D){kind=link}
![http://images.johnmauldin.com/uploads/charts/120311-03.jpg[/url]](http://images.johnmauldin.com/uploads/charts/120311-03.jpg%5B/url%5D){kind=link}
![http://images.johnmauldin.com/uploads/charts/120311-04.jpg[/url]](http://images.johnmauldin.com/uploads/charts/120311-04.jpg%5B/url%5D){kind=link}
![http://images.johnmauldin.com/uploads/charts/120311-05.jpg[/url]](http://images.johnmauldin.com/uploads/charts/120311-05.jpg%5B/url%5D){kind=link}
