I'm going to bed, I'm drunk and shouldn't be debating. MY BAD>

The real problem is with the people in the U.S that allowed this to continue for 30 years, you would figure that at some point we would have went ape shit by now but noooooo......
Really folks we have a very good political system here, it's just that it got over ran by the rich and super corporations over the decades and we made them get away with it.
Obama had the U.S by the balls after his election and what did we do in the 2010 elections, we negated any chance he had at resolving some of our economic issues by setting the Republican up for a total victory. As if the Republicans were actually going to support Obama's efforts to remove some these 30 year old Republican made policies that basically sold our government to the highest bidder and lined the Republican and conservative Democrats pockets with infinite campaign/personal  funds/income.
The people of this nation have become way too distracted and sedated to even make an attempt to save whats left of this precious country. Bottom line, blame your goddamn selves you bunch of pussies.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AYXKkNx4cnY

Or maybe some of us just disagree with what exactly the problem is. I mean, I can't help but notice that the kind of people who stay up all night drinking and playing video games and finally pass out just around the time I'm leaving to go to work always seem to insist there is someone else ("teh rich!") keeping them down. Why would they even bother?

And do you seriously think it's only Republicans and Blue Dogs who get money from big business? Turns out Wall Street gives more money to that guy you insist was gonna crack the whip on them and fix everything than to anyone else.

The problem, the REAL problem, besides trickle-down, is the tax system.

There are currently so many loopholes that trickle-down cannot work. In theory, ie; on paper, it does work, because the money changes hands and creates taxable opportunities. However, the way it is now (even the fed chairman said so) the top 1% (and many other super rich) can literally go without paying any taxes due to loopholes.

The only real solution I've seen is to have a flat tax, because the current tax code is filled with these loopholes, and a flat income tax would have to start from scratch, but the flat sales tax looks promising too.

Also, our current market is not really a free market. We need to free up competition.

No idea, I wasn't alive during Reagan's time. All I know is I hate people who just want to blindly tax the rich because "they don't need that much money and they won't notice if we take half their money away". The government needs to keep its nose out of economics and let things work themselves out. After all, the government is there to protect the people, not to make everyone equal.

How the fuck do you embed videos, nowadays? Why must it always change?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vDhcqua3_W8

Do understand that the top 1% do get taxed pretty heavily - they pay about 50% of all income taxes. However, I agree - too many loopholes are killing our tax system for the rich and middle class alike.

In other news, Bannedagain must be one of the worst debaters in VGC's history.

I was going to point out something similar for bannedagain, but I thought I would just be wasting my time ...

One of the problems with inequality metrics (including the graph I used earlier) is that they don't control for other factors. Age is one factor that is well demonstrated by your video, and few people expect an 18 year old straight out of highschool to have the same earning potential as a 50 year old. Secondly, there is household composition as was pointed out (partially) by bannedagain ... Since the 1960s the number of single parent households has increased while, at the same time, the number of dual income homes has also increased; and the trend has been for women to choose more ambitious careers, while (at the same time) choosing a partner with an achievement level similar or greater to her own.

When you combine these together, we end up comparing a dual income household with a Doctor and a Lawyer at the end of their career against a single income household at the beginning of their career and complain that there is inequality between them.

If you want to argue about this core problem, can you answer what percentage of new jobs created require advanced skills and more training?  There may be a shortage of workers on the higher end, but exactly what is being created to absord 60% of the population and get them work?  And the issue of why also goes back to ALL jobs, even skilled ones.  Why hire American IT workers, when you can get Indian IT workers for a much lower rate.  Is there ANY profession not impacted by globalization, unless the jobs can't be moved, because they are physically tied to a certain area?

They inherited the assets that gain value or the money to invest in those assets, they didn't work or go to school for the money.