The 3 Percenters

[Monkei]

Has anybody been following this movement? These are the real out there groups that are probably more dangerous than terrorists.

They are all in with this close down DC parade of trucks happening tomorrow.

[ijusluvit]

Extremist groups are always scary to us middle class folks.

Any chance the 3 percenters are as dangerous to our democratic future as the 1%?
(That would be those who are gobbling the nation's wealth like pacman and systematically depriving the middle class of the spending power to make our economy strong again.)

[Indydealmaker]

Extremist groups are always scary to us middle class folks.

Any chance the 3 percenters are as dangerous to our democratic future as the 1%?
(That would be those who are gobbling the nation's wealth like pacman and systematically depriving the middle class of the spending power to make our economy strong again.)

I guess you think wealthy people hide their cash under their beds so that it is never seen again.

The wealthy spend spend spend. Dining out. Hotels. Resorts. Vacations. Cars, boats, planes, jewelry, houses, insurance. They invest in businesses that employ millions.

They invest in funds that invest in mortgages so that millions of employees can get mortgages. They invest in funds that provide money to companies that loan money to ohter companies for capital equipment and expansion as well as start up funds.

Not to mention they pay about half of all of the income taxes in this country as well as huge chunks of sales tax and excise taxes.

In this country, you create as much wealth as you want. You just have to pay the price. Most people will not dedicate 100% of their time and energy to do what it takes. To say that the wealthy suck up all of the money sounds like 60s Berkeley rhetoric. Inaccurate then and now.

[perrjojo]

Extremist groups are always scary to us middle class folks.

Any chance the 3 percenters are as dangerous to our democratic future as the 1%?
(That would be those who are gobbling the nation's wealth like pacman and systematically depriving the middle class of the spending power to make our economy strong again.)

I have always wanted to be a 1 percenter...never quite made it...but good for them.

[perrjojo]

:BigApplause::BigApplause:I guess you think wealthy people hide their cash under their beds so that it is never seen again.

The wealthy spend spend spend. Dining out. Hotels. Resorts. Vacations. Cars, boats, planes, jewelry, houses, insurance. They invest in businesses that employ millions.

They invest in funds that invest in mortgages so that millions of employees can get mortgages. They invest in funds that provide money to companies that loan money to ohter companies for capital equipment and expansion as well as start up funds.

Not to mention they pay about half of all of the income taxes in this country as well as huge chunks of sales tax and excise taxes

In this country, you create as much wealth as you want. You just have to pay the price. Most people will not dedicate 100% of their time and energy to do what it takes. To say that the wealthy suck up all of the money sounds like 60s Berkeley rhetoric. Inaccurate then and now.

Amen! We have spent our whole life working toward being a 1 percenter but never quite made it. I hate to think where we would be without the 1%.
I mean really, who wants their goal to be in the bottom percent?

[graciegirl]

I have never heard this before moving here. As if achieving financial success is a bad thing.

Stealing from people is bad, but not working hard and risking your own money to gain success in business and employing people who you care about. I know of five people who would not retire and join their wives full time here because doing so would cause the people who worked for them to lose their jobs..

It simply is not true what some think. Not all financially successful people are bad or any different than anyone else. There are selfish ones and good ones, but not lazy ones for sure.

Not that I think I am one of the wealthy. Well I am, I have Sweetie and Helene. I have everything I want in this world. I do not begrudge anyone their financial success. I know it is the haves that keep the economy alive and their taxes pay a lot of welfare.

I now know what class envy is. We should all be proud of our independence and look with pride on what we have accomplished, taking care of ourselves and our own families.

The person who should take care of us, is we ourselves. The government shouldn't be our mother.

Envy is an awful thing and money does not keep illness or death or sorrow from happening. I have found that most of us have about an equal share of sad and awful things happen in our lives, no matter how we plan or what we do.

[NotGolfer]

I have never heard this before moving here. As if achieving financial success is a bad thing.

Stealing from people is bad, but not working hard and risking your own money to gain success in business and employing people who you care about. I know of five people who would not retire and join their wives full time here because doing so would cause the people who worked for them to lose their jobs..

It simply is not true what some think. Not all financially successful people are bad or any different than anyone else. There are selfish ones and good ones, but not lazy ones for sure.

Not that I think I am one of the wealthy. Well I am, I have Sweetie and Helene. I have everything I want in this world. I do not begrudge anyone their financial success. I know it is the haves that keep the economy alive and their taxes pay a lot of welfare.

I now know what class envy is. We should all be proud of our independence and look with pride on what we have accomplished, taking care of ourselves and our own families.

The person who should take care of us, is we ourselves. The government shouldn't be our mother.

Envy is an awful thing and money does not keep illness or death or sorrow from happening. I have found that most of us have about an equal share of sad and awful things happen in our lives, no matter how we plan or what we do.

Amen!!!

[ilovetv]

Watch this clip and see what you think of the illustration she gives at 2:06.

Thatcher's Last Stand Against Socialism - YouTube

[Dr Winston O Boogie jr]

Watch this clip and see what you think of the illustration she gives at 2:06.

Thatcher's Last Stand Against Socialism - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rv5t6rC6yvg)

She makes an excellent point, We always hear about the gap between the rich and the poor becoming wider but the truth is that even though that might be true the poor are still better off than they were forty years ago.

Look at it this way. If the poor are at 3 and the rich are at 5, the gap is two. If the poor go to 6 and the rich go to ten, the gap is 4 but the poor have double their income exactly the same as the rich have. Even if the rich go to 20 and the poor go to eight, the poor are still better off then they had been. We are a country of equal opportunity, not guaranteed equal results or equal incomes.

Some would have you believe that because the gap is now 4 that the poor are somehow less well off.

It's like John F Kennedy said, "A rising tide lifts all boats."

[manaboutown]

She makes an excellent point, We always hear about the gap between the rich and the poor becoming wider but the truth is that even though that might be true the poor are still better off than they were forty years ago.

Look at it this way. If the poor are at 3 and the rich are at 5, the gap is two. If the poor go to 6 and the rich go to ten, the gap is 4 but the poor have double their income exactly the same as the rich have. Even if the rich go to 20 and the poor go to eight, the poor are still better off then they had been. We are a country of equal opportunity, not guaranteed equal results or equal incomes.

Some would have you believe that because the gap is now 4 that the poor are somehow less well off.

It's like John F Kennedy said, "A rising tide lifts all boats."

Ted Sorenson, Kennedy's speech writer, discovered this phrase used as the slogan of The New England Council, a regional chamber of commerce. It did not originate with Kennedy.

[Parker]

I like achievers. I don't like whiners. Earn your own.

[allus70]

If it is true that "A rising tide lifts all boats", how would one explain the fact that since 2009, 93% of all the income growth went to the top 1%?
Top 1% Got 93% of Income Growth as Rich-Poor Gap Widened - Bloomberg (http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-10-02/top-1-got-93-of-income-growth-as-rich-poor-gap-widened.html)

[jblum315]

:pray:

[donb9006]

She makes an excellent point, We always hear about the gap between the rich and the poor becoming wider but the truth is that even though that might be true the poor are still better off than they were forty years ago.

Look at it this way. If the poor are at 3 and the rich are at 5, the gap is two. If the poor go to 6 and the rich go to ten, the gap is 4 but the poor have double their income exactly the same as the rich have. Even if the rich go to 20 and the poor go to eight, the poor are still better off then they had been. We are a country of equal opportunity, not guaranteed equal results or equal incomes.

Some would have you believe that because the gap is now 4 that the poor are somehow less well off.

It's like John F Kennedy said, "A rising tide lifts all boats."

And where do you think the funds used to "lift the poor" to this new, higher, standard of living comes from? Everyone who isn't poor. It's costs both the rich and the middle class more and more each year to keep raising the poor's standard of living.

If it is true that "A rising tide lifts all boats", how would one explain the fact that since 2009, 93% of all the income growth went to the top 1%?
Top 1% Got 93% of Income Growth as Rich-Poor Gap Widened - Bloomberg (http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-10-02/top-1-got-93-of-income-growth-as-rich-poor-gap-widened.html)

That's where the saying the middle class is being destroyed comes from. They keep paying more and more, as their income growth stagnates. If the poor are doing so much better, they must have gotten the other 7% in income growth.

I've read articles that say when ALL benefits are added up...free housing, food, healthcare, phones, spending money...some families make the equivalent of $60,000 a year.

It's a messed up system to be sure... I believe the 3%ers want to end this big government we have now, they see themselves as the new revolutionaries, ready to overthrow and start a new government. To be honest, the colonists had FAR fewer taxes and regulations from king George, then we have now with our government. Just saying...

[Peachie]

America no longer has a middle class. We have the super-rich and the poor, with the slightly better off poor struggling to remain above the abyss.

Given this statement, what are The Villagers, super rich or poor or struggling daily? And are The Villagers children super poor watching their parents live the good life here? That brush stroke is way, way too wide and gone astray.

[graciegirl]

Overthrowing the government is going to far for me.

[buggyone]

Overthrowing the government is going to far for me.

I wonder if the NSA is following this thread? :wave:

[juneroses]

This is from an article written by Thomas Sowell, American economist, whose thoughts are often found on the Daily Sun editorial page:

"Social scientists," journalists and others who are committed to the theory that social barriers keep people down often cite statistics showing that the top income brackets receive a disproportionate and growing share of the country's income.

But the very opposite conclusion arises in studies that follow actual flesh-and-blood individuals over time, most of whom move up across the various income brackets with the passing years. Most working Americans who were initially in the bottom 20 percent of income-earners, rise out of that bottom 20 percent. More of them end up in the top 20 percent than remain in the bottom 20 percent.

People who were initially in the bottom 20 percent in income have had the highest rate of increase in their incomes, while those who were initially in the top 20 percent have had the lowest. This is the direct opposite of the pattern found when following income brackets over time, rather than following individual people.

Most of the media publicize what is happening to the statistical brackets -- especially that "top one percent" -- rather than what is happening to individual people.

We should be concerned with the economic fate of flesh-and-blood human beings, not waxing indignant over the fate of abstract statistical brackets. Unless, of course, we are hustling for an expansion of the welfare state.

[donb9006]

This is from an article written by Thomas Sowell, American economist, whose thoughts are often found on the Daily Sun editorial page:

"Social scientists," journalists and others who are committed to the theory that social barriers keep people down often cite statistics showing that the top income brackets receive a disproportionate and growing share of the country's income.

But the very opposite conclusion arises in studies that follow actual flesh-and-blood individuals over time, most of whom move up across the various income brackets with the passing years. Most working Americans who were initially in the bottom 20 percent of income-earners, rise out of that bottom 20 percent. More of them end up in the top 20 percent than remain in the bottom 20 percent.

People who were initially in the bottom 20 percent in income have had the highest rate of increase in their incomes, while those who were initially in the top 20 percent have had the lowest. This is the direct opposite of the pattern found when following income brackets over time, rather than following individual people.

Most of the media publicize what is happening to the statistical brackets -- especially that "top one percent" -- rather than what is happening to individual people.

We should be concerned with the economic fate of flesh-and-blood human beings, not waxing indignant over the fate of abstract statistical brackets. Unless, of course, we are hustling for an expansion of the welfare state.

Think about it...how much easier is it to lets say...double your income when you're making $10,000 (the bottom 20%) as opposed to when you make $5,000,000? It's much easier to statistically significantly increase your income when it's a very low number.

Be careful of "studies", they're good ways to spread misinformation. A person previously making $10,000 suddenly makes $15,000, a 50% increase in income! It sounds wonderful! The only problem is...they're still poor and still need assistance. Whereas someone making $100,000 gets a $5000 increase...it's only 1/2 of a percent.

[Peachie]

Think about it...how much easier is it to lets say...double your income when you're making $10,000 (the bottom 20%) as opposed to when you make $5,000,000? It's much easier to statistically significantly increase your income when it's a very low number.

Be careful of "studies", they're good ways to spread misinformation. A person previously making $10,000 suddenly makes $15,000, a 50% increase in income! It sounds wonderful! The only problem is...they're still poor and still need assistance. Whereas someone making $100,000 gets a $5000 increase...it's only 1/2 of a percent.

And perhaps we should be aware of people skewing the original study information to fit their own scenario. This is the statement, Don:

"Most working Americans who were initially in the bottom 20 percent of income-earners, rise out of that bottom 20 percent. More of them end up in the top 20 percent than remain in the bottom 20 percent.

People who were initially in the bottom 20 percent in income have had the highest rate of increase in their incomes, while those who were initially in the top 20 percent have had the lowest. This is the direct opposite of the pattern found when following income brackets over time, rather than following individual people".

It didn't state that the people studied ended up with an additional $10,000. income. It did state that more of the people studied ended up in the TOP 20 percent than remained in the bottom 20 percent.

[perrjojo]

Given this statement, what are The Villagers, super rich or poor or struggling daily? And are The Villagers children super poor watching their parents live the good life here? That brush stroke is way, way too wide and gone astray.

Exactly what I was thinking!

[Patty55]

I wonder if the NSA is following this thread? :wave:

I thought they were on layoff.

[perrjojo]

It seems to me that many think that if I have "more" and you have "less" that I somehow took "mine from "yours.

[ijusluvit]

I'm a little disappointed that only one poster so far seems to see the trend I see. I consider myself one of the lucky ones, I've come close to making it to the 1%, and I started with nothing. That truly is the realization of the American Dream. Virtually everyone I knew throughout my life had the OPPORTUNITY to get where I have.

But not now. My kids have scraped through, thank goodness, got college educations and good jobs in education and a pension to look forward to someday. They are doing ok because they didn't pile up college debt or credit card debt since then. They escaped the greedy investor fueled recession without losing their homes. But many of my kids good, well-bred, solid middle class friends are in financial crisis. The don't have any of the assets my kids do, except their educations. They are strapped with debt or lost their house or have declared bankruptcy. And most of those are the ones who have a job!

What I'm saying is that OPPORTUNITY is vanishing for the coming generations. I could give dozens of examples and a bunch of reasons for it, but it is REAL. As wealth continues to be cornered by a few, the growing remainder become frustrated. Historically that frustration breeds groups like the 3 percenters, and ultimately, revolutionary change. It has happened over and over again, and is happening in our world as we sit here and watch the flowers grow.

It's just fine to say "Wealth is good, go out and earn yours", but for millions of Americans, that is essentially becoming impossible.

[ilovetv]

ijusluvit is right about OPPORTUNITY being the "equality" on which this nation was built. Here is an insightful commentary on that:

"How America’s founder’s understood the words 'all men are created equal'.....

America’s founders knew, obviously, that human beings are not equal in terms of strength or beauty, or in terms of intelligence, industry or talents. They understood that because of such differences, differences in talents and things like that, some people would be wealthier than others. But human beings are equal, the founders believed, in their possession of natural rights, such as the rights to life, liberty and property.

Today many Americans reject this equality of rights in order to pursue equality of condition through redistribution, or spreading the wealth around to use a famous formulation.

This is destructive of liberty as the founders understood it."


Constitution Minute Episode 1 (http://constitutionminute.hillsdale.edu/episode1)

[Villages PL]

The rich are rich because they have made good choices in life; they are generally productive and they mostly keep doing whatever is required to maintain their wealth. When people are poor, and stay poor, it's usually because they keep making poor choices and are generally unproductive.

Having said that, class status is not static. The poor often move up to middle class and some become very wealthy. And there are the wealthy who take big risks and go bankrupt. The charts that show a big gap between rich and poor don't tell that story and that leads some people to think that the rich and poor are always the same people.

------------------------------------------------------

Life is too short; let's lengthen it!

[Bucco]

I do not think that what is being discussed is what the OP had in mind.

the 3 Percenters he refers to is, in fact, a fringe group (fringe is a relative term I think) that gets its name from the fact that only "Roughly three percent of the population fought for liberty at any given time during the American war for Independence"

This is the OP..."Has anybody been following this movement? These are the real out there groups that are probably more dangerous than terrorists.

They are all in with this close down DC parade of trucks happening tomorrow.

I also do not think the parade of trucks is OFFICIALLY tied to the "3 percenters" although it appears they share many of the same concerns.

Both groups are strict constitutionalists and I would think might be called fringe, but none of it has to do with the economy or such