Skip to comments.As Obama hammers ‘income inequality,’ gap grows under his presidency
Posted on 01/21/2014 8:08:58 AM PST by Kaslin
Income inequality -- the gap between the rich and poor -- is an issue U.S. presidents of both parties have spoken of for years.
President Clinton touted, toward the end of his term, that wages were rising "at all income levels" for the first time in decades. President George W. Bush, toward the end of his, pondered the best way to respond to income inequality, noting some policies "lift people up" and some "tear others down."
But perhaps no president has hammered the issue as emphatically as President Obama.
In his 2012 State of the Union address, Obama said: "The defining issue of our time is how to keep that promise alive. No challenge is more urgent. No debate is more important. We can either settle for a country where a shrinking number of people do really well, while a growing number of Americans barely get by, or we can restore an economy where everyone gets a fair shot, and everyone does their fair share, and everyone plays by the same set of rules."
But a look back shows that income inequality has grown, not shrunk, under the current president.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
I understand about 85 people hold half the worlds wealth...
There is nothing quite so silly as millionaire liberals (and RINOs) raising hell about other rich people who havent yet been stripped of all their money by Obamas Free S**t Army.
A highly doubtful stat.
You might be right but there is no disputing the ever expanding gap between the very wealthy and the working folk and poor.
World’s 85 richest people own nearly half of global wealth
And if it was wrong by say 100, it would still be an eyeopening revelation.
“There is nothing quite so silly as millionaire liberals (and RINOs) raising hell about other rich people who havent yet been stripped of all their money by Obamas Free S**t Army.”
Meh. I can’t get too worked up over this. The last election was a clear choice, but either way, I’m not in the group of big winners.
If Romney had won, we’d have pivoted back to rewarding business for productivity. That would be better for me, but the reality is, when Republicans had their way, we were shipping jobs and means of manufacture overseas as fast as we could. Add to that GWB’s spending, and there’s not a lot to recommend the GOP. However, business people should have done all they could to get Romney elected.
When a communist wins, the real winners are the political class. They will gain wealth and power. This class warfare stuff will help accelerate that.
Why is no one calling attention to THEIR millions? How can they stand at their podiums and demand the rich citizens share their wealth without every finger in the country pointing back at them and calling them hypocrites?
The "Share the wealth" democrat politicians are rich, rich, rich! Why aren't THEY redistributing THEIR wealth FIRST so they can show us all how it's done ??
Absolutely true ... as it grows under all forms of socialism
Publisher Clearing House got nuthin’ on the lottery that mr and mrs “lyin’ king” hit. Think they’ll eschew the “retirement” pay and decide to live on a measly $100k/yr? Not bloody likely. Will mrs “lyin’ king” donate all the proceed from her upcoming “memoirs” to the naacp or the ghetto dwellers? Didn’t think so.
If they got their money legally, the government has no right to take it away from them.
That's what makes it so silly to hear wealthy Libs and Pols preaching "Hate The Rich!"
And the increasing gap is made possible by those very people in power who rebel-rouse with their Class-Envy rants and tirades while lining their own pockets and the pockets of their wealthy friends.
Obama as an example, has built his career, lofty position and wealth on the exploitation of envy (racial, class and wealth), while becoming ever more wealthy and further removed from the very people he to whom he preaches "Hate The Rich"!!
funny, I don’t remember “income inequality” as being one of the federal government’s legitimate areas of concern (enumerated powers)....
I am well aware of the bogus Oxfam report.
That article relies on Oxfam statistics.
Oxfam refuses to show their underlying “data” — because they don’t have any.
In short, it’s complete fabricated B.S. from a communist-leaning organization that decided to make a press release because it fits the media meme of evil capitalist.
Liberal groups do this all the time: bogus organization with a fax machine and a website sends out press release. Media picks it up because it fits with their pre-conceived notions of the world. Soon, the Big Lie is repeated so often people believe it.
Didn’t you notice how the bogus report was nicely coincided with the bogus “war on income inequality” Obama has going on?
I expect more from Freepers.
Oh, it’s not “other rich people” that they target - it’s people who earn their own way via income.
Other forms of wealth are taxed at a much lower rate.
Income inequality is the new social justice.
Another round of absurd logic by the elites.
For the same reason the Terrorist Leaders do not do suicide bombing and leave it to the ‘useful idiots’ they fill with insane ideology.
Obama care is the same as the 72 Virgins, of course there will be 72 unbelieving virgins in hell, but with no sex in the hereafter...what’s the point? They are unusable. The same with the O C, everyone gets coverage however using it may be a different story!
Check out this story where Gates believes the Dems can eradicate poor people in 50 yrs...lol Jesus said ‘the poor you have with you always’.
The analysis here from Heather Boushey (Equitable Growth Institute) is so breathtakingly idiotic I wonder why it was included. Yeah, the problem is Obama didn’t focus enough on unemployment. Thank heavens for anything Obama didn’t focus on, we’re still sifting through the debris of the health insurance and foreign policy matters he did focus on.
Income inequality is growing because the Fed is artificially suppressing interest rates and flooding the stock market with freshly printed virtual cash. 0% interest means there is no way for most people to safely grow savings and create investment capital, while big investors reap insane rewards.
Oddly enough these distortions play right into the Democrat party’s need for an issue to shift focus away from Obamacare and other failures.
Well, can we see your stats?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.