Strange: Income Inequality In Big Cities, Which Tend To Lean Democrat, Continues To Grow

It’s an article of faith within Liberal circles that income inequality is a Bad Thing, and that the way to solve it is not by creating an atmosphere for good paying jobs, but by confiscatory policies and demagogueing. Alas, we find out something bad about big cities, which mostly tend to be chock full of way more Democrat voters than Republican voters

(UK Daily Mail) The gap between the rich and poor in big cities in the United States is still widening, according to a new report.

Atlanta is the most unequal city with the wealthy taking home nearly 20 times more than low-income households, data from the Brookings Institution revealed.

The analysis compared 2013 census data for the top five per cent of earners with the bottom 20 per cent to work out the difference in wages.

Liberals can’t blame the messenger for this one. The Brookings Institution is vastly left leaning institution during this century, and has received large amounts of funding from George Soros, who certainly wouldn’t fund a right leaning organization.

Nationwide the rich took home around 9.3 times more money – but in big cities it was up to 11.6 times.

It showed the average wage for top earners in Atlanta was $288,159 – nearly $274,000 more than the bottom fifth’s earnings.

The income gap was also large in San Francisco, Boston and Miami, with San Francisco boasting the highest earnings for the wealthy at $423,171. Rich households in Washington were the only others to top $300,000.

The gap in Washington, D.C., is 14.4. NYC’s gap is 13.7. Chicago and Los Angeles are at 12.5.

In all fairness, the Brookings Institution article does note (the Daily Mail doesn’t) that many cities, including many on the list of those which have seen a big increase in the income gap, have seen a significant rise in incomes for those in the bottom 20%. Jacksonville, Florida saw a jump of 18.1%, and San Francisco saw income rise 15.1%. Brookings concludes

These findings confirm that income inequality remains a salient issue in many big cities today. Moreover, they lend support to the concern that rising incomes at the top of the distribution are not—at least in the short term—lifting earnings near the bottom, even in local markets.

Since the debate over the $15/hour minimum wage started in Seattle in late 2013, many other cities—including Chicago, Los Angeles, New York, and San Francisco—are considering or have enacted increases to the minimum wage locally. While the minimum wage is a potentially important means for helping low-earner households living in high-cost places, local policymakers should not ignore the other tools they have at hand—from education to economic development to housing and zoning policies—that are essential for improving social mobility and sustaining income diversity in big cities today.

Some of those measures include amnesty for illegal aliens, who tend to depress wages, and will still depress wages even as legal citizens/residents, due to their status as low wage, uneducated workers. Universal pre-school is somehow supposed to Do Something for income. They never explain how. Raising the minimum wage just tends to reduce the number of workers. Maybe heavily liberal cities should do a bit of navel gazing as to why the cost of living is so darned high in their heavily liberal cities.

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

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

7 Responses to “Strange: Income Inequality In Big Cities, Which Tend To Lean Democrat, Continues To Grow”

  1. Jeffery says:

    the way to solve it is not by creating an atmosphere for good paying jobs, but by confiscatory policies and demagogueing.

    You don’t identify the advocates of “confiscatory policies and demagogueing” to solve the problem of income/wealth inequality, but we can conclude you attribute these policies (without evidence) to liberals.

    Why do we have worsening income inequality? There are several reasons.

    Our “trade” and immigration policies put US workers in direct competition with lower paid global workers. On the other hand, policies protect high income groups from competition. These policies benefit our donor/capitalist class at the expense of actual workers.

    Our Fed manages monetary policy to keep inflation very low at the expense of employment. High unemployment gives workers much less bargaining power and reduces pressures on wages – benefitting the donor/capitalist class at the expense of actual workers. In addition, Federal fiscal policy keeps unemployment high during recessions further reducing bargaining power.

    Anti labor union laws have greatly reduced the power of unions to keep worker wages and benefits high – benefitting the donor/… you get the idea.

    Our drug and technology patent laws use federally enforced monopolies to keep pharmaceutical prices ten-times higher than if there were a free market – benefitting the donor class at the expense of sick people (this transfers about $300 billion a year from the working classes to the political donor class).

    Federal tax policy now reduce taxes on the wealthy, especially on unearned income, shifting the tax burdens (mostly state, local levels and FICA) to the working classes. Recall that in times of Social Security surpluses, Congress “borrows” that money to enable lowering income taxes without adding to the deficits. At the same time, Federal policy is being pushed to reduce services that benefit workers.

    So, it’s no surprise that we’re seeing worsening income inequality. It’s not occurring by accident and it’s not “natural”. It’s a direct result of Federal policies intended to reward the political donor class at the expense of the American middle class.

    Both political parties are at fault, especially on so-called “trade” policy and patent policy, but obviously conservative policies are more honest in their unabashed support of the wealthy. It’s conservatives that hate unions. It’s conservatives that demagogue deficits and debt and taxes. It’s conservatives that are trying to cut Social Security and Medicare so they can further reward their constituency, the wealthy.

  2. Jeffery says:

    illegal aliens, who tend to depress wages, and will still depress wages even as legal citizens/residents

    The reality is we are not going to deport the 10-20 million undocumented people in the US. The reality is that undocumented status contributes to low wages. The reality is that our economic system does not support our populace as it has in the past. A comprehensive immigration policy that recognizes reality AND that regulates the immigration of foreign workers is required.

  3. John says:

    Actually Teavh you must of misread the Liberal Catechism
    Our faith teaches us that extreme income inequality is wrong

    Most religions do teach that
    Only true narcissists might feel so self centered as to feel otherwise
    Not help the poor

  4. jl says:

    J-“Federal tax policies now reduce taxes on the wealthy, especially on unearned income, shifting tax burdens (state, local and FICA)to the working classes.” What? If your definition of “working class” means the bottom 50% of wage earners, they’ve never had it so good as far as federal income taxes are concerned. The “working class”, if that’s what you call it, pay only 3% of the federal bill, which means the top 50% pays 97% of the bill. “Reduce taxes on the wealthy..” Here we go again. The top 1% pays almost 39% of federal income taxes, the top 10% pays 70% of income taxes. Why would you say reduced taxes on the wealthy, when their taxes recently went up, including taxes on “unearned income”? And as far as income inequality, you of course as a liberal place no blame personal behavior. The lady down the street having a couple more children when she couldn’t even afford the first one obviously has nothing to do with her lot in life. Or the guy on the corner selling drugs- it’s not his fault, it’s the pharmaceutical companies fault.

  5. Jeffery says:


    Did you miss my parenthetical (state, local and FICA)? Federal income taxes are not the only taxes people pay. Social Security and Medicare taxes are regressive as are most local, state and sales taxes. Here we go again. You are trying to mislead by only looking at Federal income tax.

    You, as a conservative, only blame personal behavior. And only the personal behaviors of certain groups, at that.

    Tell me more about the increase in taxes on the wealthy.

  6. jl says:

    Why would “most state, local and sales taxes be regressive?” That’s just stupid. If a sales tax is regressive, then so is every item that one would buy, because it would take a larger percentage of one’s income. So in your “logic” you’re proclaiming that, say, the sales tax on a loaf of bread is regressive because it costs a poor person more of his salary than a rich person? Anyway, people with more money buy more things, hence they pay more in sales taxes. People with more money obviously make larger salaries, hence they pay more in state income taxes. “You, as a conservative, only blame personal behavior, and only certain groups as that.” Never said that, as there people in all groups who do the above behaviors. But one more thing- you, as a liberal, only focus on how much money is confiscated by the government and not on the over spending by the government. “Tell me about tax increases on the wealthy.” Sure. Under Obama, the top rate went from 35% to 39.6%. The capital gains tax was increased to 20% from 15% on the wealthy. Also, there is new phase-out of itemized deductions for the wealthy. Deductions for mortgage interest, charities, and state and local income taxes were reduced. But remember, if you don’t think we’re taxed enough, look to your liberal buddies in congress. When they had super majorities during Obama’s first term they could have raised them to whatever rate they wanted.

  7. Monday morning links

    Pythons wipe out rabbits—and much more—in Everglades California has plenty of water Mystery Mammals’ Ancestry Was Revealed by Proteins, Not DNA Louise, their middle child, was diagnosed with severe autism and psychosis as a teen This Week’s Cons

Pirate's Cove