Joe Biden Notes That Obama Administration Has Been Really Bad For Income Inequality

Not in so many words, but if we read between the lines, we can see that Biden was just speaking the truth

(CNN) Vice President Joe Biden emphasized the issue of income inequality to a gathering of major donors and activists Friday night, telling them Democrats will work to address it to help working people, an attendee at the event told CNN.

The remarks came during a reception for a coalition of liberal organizations called Democracy Alliance.

Biden told the gathering that income in the United States is the most unequal it has been since the 1920s, according to an attendee, who spoke to CNN on the condition he not be identified since it was a private event. Income inequality appeared to be a priority for this audience, and has been a key focus for such leaders as Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Massachusetts, who received a warm welcome when she spoke to the group Thursday.

Vice President Joe Biden ….we actually have to identify him by the title, because lots of people have no idea who he is…. is speaking like he hasn’t been a part of the presidential administration in charge for the last 6 years. A Democratic one. Democrats were in charge of the Senate from January 2007 till January 2015. Democrats controlled the House from January 2007-January 2011.

The Democracy Alliance is a shadowy network of hard left Progressives, organized by George Soros’ billions, donating without disclosure to other far left institutions. Politico noted about this same confab, in regards to Elizabeth “Fauxahontas” Warren

The Democracy Alliance has had an outsized influence in Democratic politics. It works to leverage its donors’ massive bank accounts to steer the party to the left on causes dear to liberals — including fighting to reduce economic inequality and the role of money in politics. Warren has emerged as a standard-bearer for those fights, and her address on Thursday dealt with economic inequality.

So, you have super rich folks using their money not to actually increase the wages of their workers, but donating to Democracy Alliance to force Other People to Do Something about income inequality. For the most part, though, Democracy Alliance simply gathers the money and distributes it to other far far left Progressive organizations, at least from what can be gathered, because they are super secret. And it is truly amusing that Biden would be talking about income inequality in front of Democrat voting rich folks who tend to give their money to campaigns and such rather than their own workers.

Here’s what Progressive policies brought us

For all Democrat caterwauling about Bush, we can see that it is much worse under Obama. The top 1% are garnering 93 cents of every dollar made under Obama, while growth of wages for the 99% stagnates. Yet, Obama is pushing hard to amnesty at least 5 million illegal aliens, meaning more wage stagnation.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at 1800flowers.com. Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

19 Responses to “Joe Biden Notes That Obama Administration Has Been Really Bad For Income Inequality”

  1. Dana says:

    There’s a real problem with charts comparing the top 1% to the bottom 99%, and that is the fluidity of group membership. The top 1% being so small, you have a significant percentage of them moving into and out of the group, whereas the sheer size of the bottom 99% washes away those differences. To make any real sense, the statistics would have to identify the top 1% by individuals, to note what percentage of the pre-recession top 1% are no longer in the top 1%, and what percentage are “new” members.

  2. Jeffery says:

    Finally, we all agree that income inequality is an important issue threatening the stability of America!

    What should we do about it? Clearly whatever we’ve been doing for the past 40 years has not been working. Our so-called “trade” treaties, union bashing, stagnant minimum wage, fiscal policies against full employment, monetary policies that favor unemployment, tax policies that promote excessive executive pay… and cutting Social Security and Medicare benefits will not help. Further cutting taxes on the wealthy will not help.

  3. gitarcarver says:

    Clearly what the Democrats have been proposing has not been working.

    Allowing people choices in whether to join a union or not makes economies better. Protecting businesses because of unions have hurt the economy. Excessive taxing of businesses have moved money out of the country.

    The Democrats and liberals have no other solutions than to tax more and give more of other people’s money away.

    That has been proven not to help any gap or the economy, but you facts don’t matter to liberals.

  4. Jeffery says:

    The loss of unions has not helped the economy. It’s gotten worse. Allowing deadbeats to take advantage of union membership without paying dues seems unfair, don’t you think?

    Corporate tax collections are low, not high.

    Which of my following “solutions” are mere taxing and giving away other peoples’ monies?

    “Our so-called “trade” treaties, union bashing, stagnant minimum wage, fiscal policies against full employment, monetary policies that favor unemployment, tax policies that promote excessive executive pay”

    You make less sense with each of your typings. You’re panicking. It’s frightening, I know, when your vestigial reason starts reawakening, threatening your deep-seated ideologies, and supplanting them with facts and reason. It’s as if your whole world is falling apart – as if all you have thought and done is a fraud. You just have to be honest with yourself, forgive yourself, and move forward in a world of reason and truth.

  5. gitarcarver says:

    The loss of unions has not helped the economy. It’s gotten worse.

    Yet in states without mandatory union participation, the economies are doing better.

    For example, do you think that government employee unions add anything to the economy? Perhaps you missed the VA mess where incompetent employees are so difficult to fire that there is very little fear of being accountable for anything.

    Allowing deadbeats to take advantage of union membership without paying dues seems unfair, don’t you think?

    Taking people’s money to advocate things which they are against is more than unfair, don’t you think?

    Corporate tax collections are low, not high.

    And they should be lower, but that doesn’t matter to you. Tell us Jeffery, are you paying what you think others should be paying? Is your little company paying more than the government requires?

    Which of my following “solutions” are mere taxing and giving away other peoples’ monies?

    Well, let’s see, shall we?

    Oh wait, did you offer any solutions?

    You want to make union membership mandatory. That is taking people’s money. You want policies to limit executive pay. That is taking other people’s money. You want higher taxes. That is taking other people’s money.

    You can’t even friggin’ read or understand your own rantings.

  6. jl says:

    J- “Corporate tax collections are low, not high.” Total BS, as usual, J. For the latest time period I saw, which was 2009-2010, corporate tax revenues rose 40% from 138 billion in 2009 to 192 billion in 2010. Try to be intelligent and not get your “info” from the Huffington Post, or wherever. Corporate taxes as a percentage of GDP is as misleading as you can get. If GDP goes up faster, then the percentage would go down. If other revenue sources, such as the individual income tax goes up, then the percentage of corporate to GDP would go down, even though, as I showed you, total revenue in dollars, which is what counts, is way up. Did you miss 8th grade math where they were supposed to teach you about percentages? You know, as in when the number you’re comparing to goes up, the percentage goes down? Guess not.

  7. jl says:

    J- “Union bashing..” Who’s bashing unions, J? Or in your world is the choice to join called “bashing”?

  8. Jeffery says:

    j,

    For someone as incurious and simple as you, I recommend Wikipedia to get you started.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate_tax_in_the_United_States

    Much of this uses CBO or Federal Reserve data. Once you master the basics we can continue your lessons.

    Here’s a NYTs article that discusses much of what is wrong with the current system.

    The corporate tax system in the US is deeply flawed, and needs to be fixed.

    Your concept that the taxes paid as a proportion of GDP is irrelevant is just dumb.

  9. Jeffery says:

    As you know, I pay all my taxes, and make no efforts to reduce my tax burden. My little company obeys all US tax laws to a T, and makes no efforts to reduce our tax burdens by questionable means. I pay more federal taxes some years than General Electric. So do you. This topic is just another of your many diversions.

    You claim that corporate taxes should be even lower. Why? Some probably should be lower, but some should probably be higher. Just lowering the nominative rate is not the answer. We need to simplify the entire system and make it more fair.

    What are your suggestions for correcting the income and wealth inequalities that are choking the American economy? That was the original question. If you think things are OK now, please just say so. Should we just eliminate all corporate taxes on profits? Since the proportion of total revenues from corporate taxes continues to drop, that is not as crazy as it sounds. We would have to make up the deficit by taxing others but we could do it. Would this help to make income and wealth more fair? Don’t know.

    I didn’t suggest that we directly limit executive pay. We DO need to make corporate governance more responsive to shareholders who by and large do not support execs being rewarded at the expense of the folks who actually carry out the work of the company. For example, our tax laws encourage corporations to maintain corporate jets for the executives business and personal use. That way corporations can hide executive compensation – who wouldn’t love to have a personal jet at your disposal for taking the family to France? And all as a tax deductible expense for the company!

    Are you familiar with how corporate boards work? I doubt that most shareholders support the looting of the company by the executives.

  10. Interestingly, FDR was against public sector unions. Weird, huh?

  11. gitarcarver says:

    For someone as incurious and simple as you, I recommend Wikipedia to get you started.

    For someone as illiterate as you, maybe you should have someone read you the article. Let’s start with the lede, shall we?

    At 35%, the United States has the highest nominal top corporate tax rate in any of the world’s developed economies.[1] However, the average corporate tax rate in 2011 dipped to 12.1%, its lowest level since before World War I, largely due to the great recession and a bonus depreciation tax break.[2]

    So j was right and you were wrong.

    We need to simplify the entire system and make it more fair.

    The tax system in general needs to be simplified, but who decides what is “fair?”

    How “fair” is it that the majority of people in the country are not paying income taxes? Is that what you consider “fair?” Yet you think it would be fair if those people paid more in taxes.

    As you know, I pay all my taxes, and make no efforts to reduce my tax burden.

    We know no such thing. Prove it.

    Given your long history of being less than truthful, there is no reason to believe your statement. Prove it.

    Finally, the other day I heard a great saying from an economist which was “Money is atheistic. It owes no allegiance to any set of economic principles or systems. Money goes where it can get the most return.”

    What people like you don’t realize is that companies and people with money are saying they are keeping their money and investments off shore because of the tax rates of the United States. Yet your solution is always to raise the tax rates. Anyone can see that will not benefit the return of money to the country but yet that is what you and people of your ilk want.

  12. Jeffery says:

    gc,

    Go fudge yourself concerning my finances. It’s none of your business.

    Come to think of it, why should we believe that you are not suckling at the teat of Mother America, collecting disability for your PTSD resulting from your prison stent, not to mention your Medicaid.

    Please prove to me you are not taking any transfer payments from the government please. At that time we can discuss how big a hypocrite you are. In fact, am I the only entrepreneur that comments here? I take no, none, nada, zip, government handouts. No SS, Medicare, Medicaid, unemployment or ACA. I’m a maker, not a taker. How about youse guys?

    I agree with you that it is not fair that over 40% of Americans earn so little that they don’t have to pay federal income taxes! You’ll be pleased to know that they pay their full share of state and local taxes as well as all their Federal payroll taxes (Social Security and Medicare) to subsidize your disability payments and your friends’ old age pensions and healthcare. In fact they pay as high a percentage of the their income on taxes as do the super wealthy! How can that be, you ask? (You don’t ask because you are incurious). Arithmetic! And government policies that tax every dollar of the working class and give breaks and low rates to unearned income (capital gains etc).

  13. gitarcarver says:

    Go fudge yourself concerning my finances. It’s none of your business.

    You were the one that brought it up and now you are angry that you are asked to provide proof?”

    Come to think of it, why should we believe that you are not suckling at the teat of Mother America, collecting disability for your PTSD resulting from your prison stent, not to mention your Medicaid.

    Wow.

    The irrational anger you are spewing forth is telling. But that is the type of person you are, Jeffery. You have no morals.

    Most rational people can see a difference between asking for proof of something from a known liar like yourself and making an unfounded accusation such as you just did. Most adults would know the difference, but you don’t.

    I agree with you that it is not fair that over 40% of Americans earn so little that they don’t have to pay federal income taxes!

    Of course, that is not what I said, but I expect nothing less from you.

    If anything, you just proved the point that the tax code is random, capricious, and has nothing to do with what is “fair.”

    In fact, you are so ridiculously stupid that you want to lift up people who don’t pay income taxes and take government services while trying to denigrate those who pay taxes and may take the government services for which they paid.

    You really have issues, Jeffery.

    Anyway, you have failed to answer why if you think that giving more money to the government is a good thing, why you do not? I guess that comes back to you wanting others to do what you will not do.

  14. Jeffery says:

    What it comes back to is you wanting to distract from the issues since you never have an argument to make.

    Again: Do you think income inequality in the US is a problem, and if so, why?

    Economists seem to think it is a problem. Teach suggests it might be a problem (unless he only posted the piece to denigrate Obama and Biden, which would be kind of petty).

    What do you think about income inequality and the inability of so many Americans to make ends meet? It sounds to me that you think we need to make them pay more taxes and the well to do Americans like me to pay less. How will that help? For the record, I’m against fortunate folks like me paying less. And I don’t begrudge the goods and services my tax monies supply to those whom people as yourself refer to as ‘takers’. You know, those “lazy” folks serving you your senior discount coffee, helping you fill out your health questionnaires, ringing up your Depends at Walmart, driving your shuttle bus, emptying your trash, watching your grandkids at the beach and wiping up your “accidents” at the home. You know… Americans. That you and your ilk seem to hate. The wealthy have it easy enough without you giving them free blowjobs.

    So you’re not going to prove you’re not on collecting disability payments? You won’t even deny it? Hmmm.

  15. Jeffery says:

    qc,

    Here was the first mention of my taxes, you dishonest butthole.

    Tell us Jeffery, are you paying what you think others should be paying? Is your little company paying more than the government requires?

    I know, I know, you’ll rebut with some contrived technicality rather than manning up.

  16. Jeffery says:

    Here’s a nice piece by Steve Rattner in the NYT on income inequality.

    Dean Baker of CEPR critiques the Rattner piece, but softly.

    http://www.cepr.net/index.php/blogs/beat-the-press/rattner-on-income-inequality

  17. gitarcarver says:

    I know, I know, you’ll rebut with some contrived technicality rather than manning up.

    No dear pea brain, I asked if you were willing to pay more and you said that you paid all of your taxes and “make no effort to reduce your tax burden.

    As you have always claimed that you are one of the people who you want to pay more, you dodged my question of whether you are paying more because as I said, you would rather tell people what to do than lead.

    Liberals are like that. They want people to do what they are not willing to do.

    As I said, if giving more money to the government is a good thing, why don;’t you do it?

    (You really don’t have to answer that because we all know the answer.)

  18. jl says:

    J-“Read this NYT article about what’s wrong with the corporate tax system.” My post had nothing to do with what’s wrong or right with the system, it was a rebuttal to you. Anyway, that’s one opinion-so? Your Wikipedia link, which I’ve seen before, describes the US corporate tax system, so your point for that link is…what? You said corporate taxes are lower, not higher. You were proved wrong, as I showed you revenues are up. But so much for your reading comprehension. “Your concept that taxes as a percentage of GDP is irrelevant is dumb.” You know, if you actually had a rebuttal and knew what you were talking about, you’d be able to say more than it’s “dumb”. I’ll show you again that anytime one is looking at the percentage of “something” (GDP), and if that something is a variable, it’s easy to be made irrelevant. Take your salary as a % of GDP. If you receive a raise at the same time the GDP goes up, your salary as % of GDP would go down, because the GDP is such a large number. Is that a bad thing? No, because you received a raise. Conversely, your pay could be cut the same year the GDP goes down, which, as shown above, could cause you salary as a % of GDP to actually go up. Would this be good? No, because you got a pay cut. Now, tell me again why it’s dumb. Good luck.

  19. david7134 says:

    GC,
    Note that old Jeff gets real mad when someone questions his finances but is perfectly happy with attacking those in the 1% that are able to make some money. Old Jeff wants laws to take money away from people who legitimately earn it, yet he sure doesn’t want anyone to question what he is up to.

Bad Behavior has blocked 8649 access attempts in the last 7 days.