In a nutshell: Here's why trying to find common ground with the teabaggers is fruitless

LA Times: A snapshot of income disparity
LA Times ^ | February 24, 2010 | By Tim Rutten

Posted on Wednesday, February 24, 2010 7:48:21 AM by Oldeconomybuyer

Between 1992 and 2007, America's 400 richest households increased their average income by 399%, while the bottom 90% of the country's households gained just 13%. (Those percentages, by the way, reflect inflation-adjusted dollars.)

For a country that prides itself on creating opportunity and encouraging social mobility, those are distressing figures. And if you narrow the focus to Los Angeles County, the picture is even darker. According to figures compiled by the local chapter of the United Way, 1.47 million, or 15%, of the county's approximately 10.4 million residents are living in poverty, which means an annual income of $22,000 for a family of four. Close to 100,000 of those families are getting by on less than $10,000 a year.

This economic crisis has erased all the hard-won job growth that occurred in Los Angeles County over the last decade, which makes the prospect of an essentially "jobless recovery" particularly dismaying.

Moreover, two of our most disturbing pre-recession trends are likely to exacerbate things still further: Over the last decade, we've lost not only 36.1% of all traditional manufacturing jobs but also 16.3% of the positions in film, television, radio and publishing that are supposed to be a crucial part of the new "knowledge-based" economy.

Unless some dramatic, proactive steps are taken, L.A. County seems likely to become the least equal region in an increasingly unequal nation.

(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
TOPICS: Culture/Society; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: California
KEYWORDS: failure; obamanomics; recession; socialism

1 posted on Wednesday, February 24, 2010 7:48:21 AM by Oldeconomybuyer
< Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies>
To: Oldeconomybuyer
SO WHAT?

Envious degenerates.
2 posted on Wednesday, February 24, 2010 7:49:57 AM by fwdude (It is not the liberals who will destroy this country, but the "moderates.")
< Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies>
To: Oldeconomybuyer
Los Angeles County will lose even more of the positions in film, television, radio and publishing as the technology behind those products relocates to newer, better, cheaper, easier to commute to places around the country ~ and even to Canada!

I hope they didn't imagine they'd have Hollywood to kick around forever!

BTW, over the last couple of decades "commercial training films" have become an "item" in the business picture of the Washington DC SMSA. This isn't just stuff for the government. In fact, several firms in this area have gone full steam ahead into "just in time" training for the manufacture and packaging of a variety of very hightech products. The training films are made only shortly before the line starts up, and employees watch the films while doing the work.

Once we get through the Obama Super Recession (and get the Democrats out the way) I expect this new sector of the economy to boom.
3 posted on Wednesday, February 24, 2010 7:56:22 AM by muawiyah ("Git Out The Way")
< Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies>
To: Oldeconomybuyer
Tell the poor people to get their act together.
Tell the government to get out of the way of wealth creation.

What's that? The plan is to reward the poor people by giving them more goodies? And to increase government's role in all aspects of our economy? Well, good luck with that.
4 posted on Wednesday, February 24, 2010 7:56:24 AM by ClearCase_guy (We're all heading toward red revolution - we just disagree on which type of Red we want.)
< Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies>
To: Oldeconomybuyer

Maybe because those top households actually work hard to make money?

5 posted on Wednesday, February 24, 2010 7:56:35 AM by caver (Obama: Home of the Whopper)
< Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies>
To: Oldeconomybuyer

I bet most of those 90% would now be happy with 13% income growth over 15 years compared to their current negative income growth.

6 posted on Wednesday, February 24, 2010 7:58:51 AM by Codeflier (Bush, Clinton, Bush, Obama - 4 democrat presidents in a row and counting...)
< Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies>
To: Oldeconomybuyer

This is the state ...foreshadowing its intent....

7 posted on Wednesday, February 24, 2010 7:59:00 AM by mo
< Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies>
To: Oldeconomybuyer
...positions in film, television, radio and publishing that are supposed to be a crucial part of the new "knowledge-based" economy...

In the author's world, people like Babs and Whoopie make up a significant portion of the brain trust.
8 posted on Wednesday, February 24, 2010 7:59:50 AM by ComputerGuy
< Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies>
To: Oldeconomybuyer

Look on the bright side! That 90% increased their incomes while sitting in front of the TV watching Oprah drinking beer!

9 posted on Wednesday, February 24, 2010 8:01:42 AM by albie
< Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies>
To: ComputerGuy
In the author's world, people like Babs and Whoopie make up a significant portion of the brain trust.

Well, they do have an I.Q. of 150. (80 and 70, respectively.)
10 posted on Wednesday, February 24, 2010 8:03:25 AM by TruthShallSetYouFree (Kenya tell me where Obama was born?)
< Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies>
To: Oldeconomybuyer

Cry me a river! You want more of the last year? Keep piling the socialism on! The LA Times should know a thing or two about poverty. Pretty soon they’ll be asking for donations as well. Comparing LA County to the rest of the United States is like comparing apples to skyscrapers considering the overwhelming infestation of illegal aliens that now inhabit it along with their mayor. If the LA Times wanted to do the public a service they’d be urging them to get off of their fat, lazy, illegal asses and head south of the border instead of demanding other people’s hard earned money to support their illegal activities.

11 posted on Wednesday, February 24, 2010 8:03:38 AM by RU88 (Bow to no man)
< Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies>
To: albie

Oprah drinks beer?

12 posted on Wednesday, February 24, 2010 8:04:02 AM by TruthShallSetYouFree (Kenya tell me where Obama was born?)
< Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies>
To: Oldeconomybuyer
That is good, no great news. It means there really is a lot of incentive to work hard and do better. Sure, everyone gets a lift from the rising tide. But that statistic tells me the more successful you are, the higher (proportionally) are the rewards. Great news. I'm off to work, going to put in a little OT and try to work smarter, not just harder.
13 posted on Wednesday, February 24, 2010 8:05:29 AM by ThunderSleeps (obama out now! I'll keep my money, my guns, and my freedom - you can keep the change.)
< Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies>
To: TruthShallSetYouFree

My bad. “having a beer while watching Oprah drink champaign”

14 posted on Wednesday, February 24, 2010 8:06:43 AM by albie
< Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies>
To: Oldeconomybuyer

“And if you narrow the focus to Los Angeles County, the picture is even darker. “

That’s RACIST.

15 posted on Wednesday, February 24, 2010 8:07:28 AM by Celerity
< Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies>
To: albie

I like it. :)

16 posted on Wednesday, February 24, 2010 8:07:38 AM by TruthShallSetYouFree (Kenya tell me where Obama was born?)
< Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies>
To: Oldeconomybuyer

bump

17 posted on Wednesday, February 24, 2010 8:09:49 AM by VOA
< Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies>
To: Oldeconomybuyer
Between 1992 and 2007, America's 400 richest households increased their average income by 399%, while the bottom 90% of the country's households gained just 13%. (Those percentages, by the way, reflect inflation-adjusted dollars.)

Hard to make money with the government in the way.

Are they saying algore can't make money?
18 posted on Wednesday, February 24, 2010 8:10:09 AM by <1/1,000,000th%
< Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies>
To: Oldeconomybuyer

The wealthy and the poor are both in their situations for the same reason. Both groups tend to keep doing that which maintains their position................

19 posted on Wednesday, February 24, 2010 8:10:45 AM by Red Badger (Education makes people easy to lead, difficult to drive; easy to govern, but impossible to enslave.)
< Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies>
To: Oldeconomybuyer
Okay... I'm getting tired of this, but trying to explain economics to Liberals is like trying to teach your dog to drive a car. It merely annoys them and ends up in disaster. So please forgive in advance my capitalization-as-yelling meme, but perhaps, maybe just one liberal out there will see this and say: "Hmmm, maybe that's something I ought to consider..." I doubt it, but, it's worth a try.

Here goes then: The "400 richest households" of 1992 represent almost entirely a DIFFERENT GROUP OF PEOPLE THAN IN 2007" The "bottom 90%: ARE A TOTALLY DIFFERENT GROUP OF PEOPLE. 1992's bottom 10% have moved up the ladder, with some now in the top brackets. Many on "top" in 1992 are now either retired or deceased, or simply had an aberrational income in '92 due to the sale of property or inheritance, and immediately went back to their usual income level.

We do, however have an entirely new group of low income earners today. Why? Because government, especially in California pays people not to work and punishes them if they do. Because of illegal immigration. Because of bad public policy that hampers job creation through regulation, taxation, and litigation. You know: all the things that Liberals support because they just want to help people out of poverty. /s
20 posted on Wednesday, February 24, 2010 8:14:06 AM by andy58-in-nh (America does not need to be organized: it needs to be liberated.)
< Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies>
To: albie
That 90% increased their incomes while sitting in front of the TV watching Oprah drinking beer!

You already regret saying that, don't you?
21 posted on Wednesday, February 24, 2010 8:15:10 AM by Graybeard58 ("0bama's not just stupid; He’s Jimmy Carter stupid”. - Don Imus)
< Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies>
To: Oldeconomybuyer

Hey LA Times, STFU until you and your associate clowns remove all signs of wealth from the bottom of the SAT barrel goons called Hollywood.

I won’t hold my breath.

22 posted on Wednesday, February 24, 2010 8:15:55 AM by Da Coyote
< Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies>
To: Oldeconomybuyer

FAils to take into account the underground economy.

23 posted on Wednesday, February 24, 2010 8:21:15 AM by glide625 (We wouldn't find ourselves ensnared by the Evil One if we weren't nibbling at his bait!)
< Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies>
To: Oldeconomybuyer

Illegals don’t tend to bring much wealth to the table. But they do get counted for articles such as this one.

24 posted on Wednesday, February 24, 2010 8:25:25 AM by Tainan (Cogito, ergo conservatus)
< Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies>
To: Oldeconomybuyer

Big surprise. The rich have more to invest into making more money. With a little skill and a little luck, of course they worth and income is going to increase faster.

What’s important is that the “poor” didn’t get poorer.

Just one question - in the process of getting richer, how many jobs did those “evil rich” create? How many salaries did they pay?

If the rich ever stop getting richer, we’re so screwed it isn’t funny.

that works?