Where do you find the right to income equality?

There will never be income equality, unless everyone becomes equally poor. All through the histories of every culture and political climate there is no equality.
Even in the native American tribes where most possessions are owned by the Tribe there was still inequality. (But, I must say Native American Tribes are the closest to equality that you can find anywhere in history, even they did not view it as a Right).
I already know the answer to the question I started with.

Maybe a better question is what causes income inequality. I don't think you can see much clearly until you know the cause.

As long as you have people who do not aspire to greatness, and are satisfied with what they have. Or, feel a need to follow instead of lead. Who do not have the drive or ambition, to create a better life for themselves, there will always be income inequality.

It comes from being individuals. It cannot be corrected with social programs from the government. It has to be addressed with in each individual and the way they think.
Unless and individual wants to address that it is unlikely that it will ever change.

I know people who have little and they don't blame large companies for making a profit. And if you ask them (and I have talked to some of them about this)they will tell you they would do the same thing if it was reversed. In other words they would tell you they earned it they deserve it.

IPN.. Of course I get 'it'.. I am far from being an economist, but have some knowledge in self management of my own fluctuating finances, and so far, have learned to live somewhat comfortably within my own meager means. I neither envy the rich, nor pity the poor, and..of course I agree with your feelings about reducing, or elimanting corporate influence, cojoined by the government size, and wasteful spending. In evidence of that, my opinion was further enhanced during the recent 'shut down' when around 80,000 'non essential' jobs were eliminated temporarily. I DO feel for those people, but also have noted that by increased government hiring, and growth, it's highly probable this may be another manipulation by this regime to lower unemployment numbers on paper, and make this failing administration appear more successful as job creators. As America gradually awaken's, the political charades become more transparent, so without digging out our dictionary, and smudging pages.. I must ask, what part of 'non essential' don't we understand? In my humble opinion, this is just another higher form of 'induced welfare', and another burden on the tax payer, and the 'over all' economy. In the BIG picture, those '80,000 non essentials' are innocent's, as most of us are... but, also a microcosm of the other non essentials above them. I hope I haven't stepped on any toes with my observations, or made 'little' of any who fell due to these circumstances.

Okay we are in debit. & you have been telling me that we are in debit for a large part it is because of all the free loaders.

I won't disagree that there are free loaders. I just asked what is your plan? What is to been done with them? Your statements over & over seems to say there is no room for them in your system.

So tell me what is to be done with them?

Many disagree with me that Big Money sucks too much out of the system.

I say this sucking of money into too few hands is why there is this mess. You on the other hand thinks that this is what makes the system good.

I am not afraid of others being better off. But if we really have as good a system as you seem to think then why have so many been left behind?

The 50's were a time of MUCH less income inequality. Good union jobs paid well, gave paid sick time and vacation, top earnings were less of a multiple of the bottom earners, bottom earners earned more than than they do today as a fraction of the top earners, and the top tax rate was 90%, so there was money to build highways, bridges, infrastruction, and good jobs building that. So...you are implying that back THEN, people aspired to greatness, and now with the minium wage under 8 bucks, if people only aspired to greatness there would be less income inequality??

You do not think that anything is systematically making income inequality worse?? That the difference between the 50's and now is that people now just don't strive for greatness??

The system needs money to flow smoothly to be healthy
End the smooth flow of money & we get what we have now.

When too much money ends up in too few hands money just does not flow in a way that makes the system work smoothly.

Money has to be put back into the system. Be it the private sector or the government.

Seeing as the private sector wants to just sit on their money. That leaves two choices. Raise taxes or borrow the money.

Now those with extra money seem to say we will buy Treasury bonds & you can just print more money & pay us the interest.

Now the borrowed money is spent in the market & Big Money
ends up with most of that.

This a very good for those that have the money to do it.

I hope that you get the thanks you deserve from them for your part in supporting that system.

So, you think the average worker is better off today than they were in the 50's? The unions (who have less power now than ever) are the bad guys, and the bankers who crashed the economy (and have totally recovered THEIR money) are the good guys? The unions were the reason Americans in the 50's had a decent living, and that even extended to the non-unionized workers. Today, due to the lessening power of unions, due to the political efforts by the 1% to keep taxes LOW (90% top rate is now 36%) and also to tax capital gains, the money created by investment, not labor at a max 15%, to change inheritance tax so that it is only paid if estates are over 2.5 million (5 million for a couple), and BEST OF ALL, to get stupid tea party people, most of whom are old, on fixed incomes, and no where NEAR having estates of 5 million to vote for this kind of reverse robin hood crap. Every tax that is avoided by the rich will have to be borrowed or paid for by the poor and middle class.

AnnMarie

Again you post commentary embedded with hyper partisan nonsense. America was better off in the 1950s for many reasons and none of those reasons are UNIONS. 1950s we actually manufactured products in America. By the 1960s the corrupt mob controlled unions became so greedy they chased industry out and killed the middle class.

Do you actually think if Hostess raised salaries to $30.00 an hour they would have saved the company?

Another issue is the American love affair with foreign made products. The CEO of GM didn't drag anyone into a Toyota Dealer. The CEO of RCA didn't force you to buy a Sony TV. The CEO of Coors didn't force you to buy a Corona did he?

And who do you think wrote those loopholes into every tax? And for whose benefit? Congress--but mostly, your sainted democrats. Like insider trading: Martha Stewart went to prison for something congress does every day--LEGALLY! Where do you think the Kennedy money is stashed? Offshore. What about John Kerry? Offshore. How about the Rockefellers? They are the founders of the "One World Order" movement. They are the founders of the KKK. They are the sponsors of Planned Parenthood. They are forcing same-sex marriage on a majority that doesn't want it. They are behind Sex Education for kindergartners. They gave CA the "Bathroom" controversy--where boys can use girls bathrooms if they feel like 'girls'. Your party is a bunch of crackpots, plain and simple!