this is where their money actually is....after being "made" by manipulating their other money. Ie Wall St/banking/financial sector. "Global offshore wealth, defined as assets housed in a country where the owner has no legal or tax residence, grew by 6.1 percent to $8.5 trillion last year, according to the Boston Consulting Group. And what was the top destination of that wealth? Switzerland, which houses about one-quarter of all offshore assets. The approximation may even underestimate the true scale of offshore wealth, as a 2012 study from the Tax Justice Network found that the worldâs wealthy are stashing up to $32 trillion offshore, or roughly four times the BCG's estimate. The issue of offshore wealth has come into sharp focus recently as critics have accused notable figures, including former Republican Presidential Candidate Mitt Romney, of housing their money in countries with lower tax rates so they don't have to pay higher tax rates at home."
yes, but that is the way it should always go the rich should just keep getting richer and richer, far outperforming the average how does that hurt me in any way? Am I any poorer because Warren Buffet made 60 billion?
Since the 1980s, rich households in the United States have earned a larger and larger share of overall income. The 1 percent earns about one-sixth of all income and the top 10 percent about half. This is not good from an ethical standpoint or an economic one.
What would you know about ethics, you clearly demonstrate only dogma and propaganda. There is no truth in you.
yes my friend, but that is a sustainable model 1% earns 1/6 and 10% earns one half it can go on forever and ever
No it's not. Certainly not with an ever expanding division as we are seeing. The last time it was this bad was in 1928 and we know what happened next. So much money in the hands of a few a the top leads to plutocracy and a stagnant economy. Citizens United adds to the danger.
Inequality -- Crisis or Scam December 31, 2013 "...Lest we forget, it is freedom that produces inequality. Even a partly free nation unleashes the natural and acquired abilities of peoples, and the more industrious and talented inevitably excel and rise and reap the greater rewards. "Inequality ... is rooted in the biological nature of man," said James Fenimore Cooper. Yet for many people, from New York Mayor-elect Bill de Blasio to President Barack Obama to Pope Francis, income inequality is a curse in need of a cure, as there is today said to be an intolerable measure of such inequality. But let us first inspect the measuring rod. Though a family of four with $23,550 in cash income in 2013 qualified as living in poverty, this hardly tells the whole story. Consider the leveling effect of the graduated income tax, about which Karl Marx wrote glowingly in his "Communist Manifesto." The top 1 percent of U.S. earners pay nearly 40 percent of U.S. income taxes. The top 10 percent pay 70 percent. The top 50 percent pay more than 97 percent of income taxes. The poor pay nothing. Surely, trillions of dollars siphoned annually off the incomes of the most productive Americans â in federal, state and local income and payroll taxes â closes the gap somewhat. Secondly, though 15 percent of U.S. families qualify as poor, measured by cash income, this does not take into account the vast assortment of benefits they receive. The poor have their children educated free in public schools, from Head Start to K-12 and then on to college with Pell Grants. Their medical needs are taken care of through Medicaid. They receive food stamps to feed the family. The kids can get two or three free meals a day at school. Housing, too, is paid for or subsidized. The poor also receive welfare checks and Earned Income Tax Credits for added cash. In the late 1940s, our family had no freezer, no dishwasher, no clothes washer or dryer, no microwave, no air conditioning. We watched the Notre Dame-Army game on a black-and-white 8-inch DuMont. Among American families in poverty today, 1 in 4 have a freezer. Nearly half have automatic dishwashers. Almost 60 percent have a home computer. About 2 in 3 poor families have a clothes washer and dryer. Eighty percent have cellphones. Ninety-three percent of the poor have a microwave; 96 percent a color TV, and 97 percent a gas or electric stove. Not exactly les miserables. Robert Rector of The Heritage Foundation added up the cost in 2012 of the means-tested federal and state programs for America's poor and low-income families. Price tag: $927 billion. There are 79 federal programs, writes Rector, that provide cash, food, housing, medical care, social services, training and targeted education to poor and low-income Americans. "If converted to cash, means-tested welfare spending is more than sufficient to bring the income of every lower-income American to 200 percent of the federal poverty level, roughly $44,000 per year for a family of four." Then there are the contributions of churches, charities and foundations. Where in history have the poor been treated better? Certainly not in the USA in the 1950s or during the Depression. Why, then, all this sudden talk about reducing the gap between rich and poor?..." - See more at: http://cnsnews.com/node/748355#sthash.Bpn32R1a.dpuf