There is no such thing as "the 1%". It is an artificial construct of the class warriors.

There is mobility within the American economy which makes the concept of a 'permanent rich ' a myth.

A Census Bureau study for the period from 2004 to 2007, about a third of the households in the highest income quintile (the top 20%) moved down to another income group. In the same period, a third of those in the lowest income group moved to a higher group. There are rags to riches stories, and riches to rags as well.

Now admittedly that was in years when the ecomomy was seen as doing good .And that leads me to the most important point. Fix the economy and the unrest goes away. Mobility does suffer in a down economy.
Another point I continue to make is that excess regulations also restrict mobility because it makes it more difficult for the start up business to get off the ground.

One other thing that is specific to this OWS crowd. I think they are looking for instant gratification and historically that's not how it's done. When I graduated I lived week to week and had to sacrifice some wants to take care of the needs. Over time opportunities present themselves and with hard work ,thrift ,and a bit of luck I worked my way up the income ladder. College loans got paid off.A home purchased the old fashion way with my having some skin in the game to demonstrate an ability to pay off the mortgage. Working long hours when available... etc . All part of the Western work ethic that seems to have been forgotten in the entitlement era.

I read the 1st all the time too. It talks about "peaceful assembly"... not a right to assemble. In other words,it is not an absolute.

When your demonstration turns violent it crosses your constitutional threshold. When you occupy land that doesn't belong to you you cross that constitutional threshold. When you fail to get permits and disrupt other people rights you've crossed that constitutional threshold .

Tut

There is no such thing as a permanent top 1% . It is a myth.

Quote:

---

The U.S. Treasury released a study in November 2007 that examined income mobility in the U.S. from 1996 to 2005. Using data from individual tax returns, the study documented the movement of households along the distribution of real income over the 10-year period. As shown in Figure 1A, the study found that nearly 58 percent of the households that were in the lowest income quintile (the lowest 20 percent) in 1996 moved to a higher income quintile by 2005. Similarly, nearly 50 percent of the households in the second-lowest quintile in 1996 moved to a higher income quintile by 2005. Even a significant number of households in the third- and fourth-lowest income quintiles in 1996 moved to a higher quintile in 2005.

The Treasury study also documented falls in household income between 1996 and 2005. This is most interesting when considering the richest households. As shown in Figure 1B, more than 57 percent of the richest 1 percent of households in 1996 fell out of that category by 2005. Similarly, more than 45 percent of the households that ranked in the top 5 percent of income in 1996 fell out of that category by 2005.

Thus it is clear that over time, a significant number of households move to higher positions along the income distribution, and a significant number move to lower positions along the income distribution. Common reference to “classes” of people (e.g. the lowest 20 percent or the richest 10 percent) is quite misleading because income classes do not contain the same households and people over time.

---

U.S. Income Inequality: It?s Not So Bad

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

There is no such thing as "the 1%". It is an artifical construct of the class warriors.

There is mobility within the American economy which makes the concept of a 'permanent rich ' a myth.

A Census Bureau study for the period from 2004 to 2007, about a third of the households in the highest income quintile (the top 20%) moved down to another income group. In the same period, a third of those in the lowest income group moved to a higher group. There are rags to riches stories, and riches to rags as well.

Now admittedly that was in years when the ecomomy was seen as doing good .And that leads me to the most important point. Fix the economy and the unrest goes away. Mobility does suffer in a down economy.
Another point I continue to make is that excess regulations also restrict mobility because it makes it more difficult for the start up business to get off the ground.

One other thing that is specific to this OWS crowd. I think they are looking for instant gratification and historically thats not how it's done. When I graduated I lived week to week and had to sacrifice some wants to take care of the needs. Over time opportunities present themselves and with hard work ,thrift ,and a bit of luck I worked my way up the income ladder. College loans got paid off.A home purchased the old fashion way with my having some skin in the game to demonstrate an ability to pay off the mortgage. Working long hours when available ....etc . All part of the Western work ethic that seems to have been forgotten in the entitlement era.

---

Hi Tom,

Yes, I mostly agree with the above. That's why I keep saying "the so-called 1 percent"

I disagree is with the idea of permanent rich being a myth. The level of mobility is debatable. Nonetheless, I don't see there being a great 'turn over'. However, even if there was a large turnover I still don't see it changing anything.

The faces may change but it is still a case of shared values and beliefs.

Tut

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

There is mobility within the American economy which makes the concept of a 'permanent rich ' a myth.

---

That's the part you are denying - the mobility is gone.

Read the link .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

Now admittedly that was in years when the ecomomy was seen as doing good .And that leads me to the most important point. Fix the economy and the unrest goes away.

---

Hello again, tom:

No disagreement there.

But, it's easier said than done. Right now, you got both sides saying my way or the highway... Ain't nothing going to get fixed with that attitude. The Republicans are NOT interested in turning the economy around and giving Obama a victory. No way, no how, and you know that to be true. They'd rather the economy COLLAPSE because they think the Democrats will get blamed.. They're probably right. I think you'll do VERY WELL in the coming election.. But, I DON'T think you'll get 60 seats in the senate... Therefore, we're assured of gridlock for yet another term.

And the economy gets WORSE, and the people get more violent.. That shouldn't come as a surprise to you.

excon

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

read the link .

---

Got it:
http://www.economicmobility.org/asse...m%20Report.pdf

Maura Kelly: Economic mobility in the US is worse than suspected | Comment is free | guardian.co.uk

U.S. falls behind Europe in Economic Mobility between Classes

The Koch bros have their brother from another mother, Romney has Rove (BUSHS BRAIN), and the far, far, far right has Slick Rick.

I got popcorn, cheese nips, pizza and chips, and beer, if needed. You guys are so outnumbered, and totally unprepared, but its going to be interesting.

So where's the party? Should we come over to your place?

Check your local cable listings, if there is a debate on, COME ON OVER..!

May be preempted by Monday Night Football though.

The debate was Saturday night, Cain and Newt. I watched it :D

November 9, 2011 8pm ET on CNBC
Location: Oakland University in Rochester, Michigan
Sponsor: CNBC, the Michigan Republican Party and Oakland University
Participants: Bachmann, Cain, Gingrich, Huntsman, Paul, Perry, Romney, Santorum

November 10, 2011 WG's birthday

November 12, 2011 8pm ET on CBS
Location: Wofford College in Spartanburg, South Carolina
Sponsor: CBS News, The National Journal and the Republican Party of South Carolina
Participants: TBD

Happy Birthday. Wish I could've seen the Newt v Cain debate. Must've been better than the dog an pony show debates they've been having.

I missed 'em, blame it on NETFLIX, and popcorn, But the 10th is doable WG!!

You have to learn to multitask, Tal.

Obams been Neoconish? When did this happen?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wondergirl

You have to learn to multitask, Tal.

---

Doesn't eating popcorn, and watching football count? Oh and Thursday Night football starts this week, how lucky are you? :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by smoothy

Obams been Neoconish? When did this happen?

---

When he refused to get tough on the right wing, the banks, or those nickel slick republicans who rather take him down than do there jobs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by talaniman

When he refused to get tough on the right wing, the banks, or those nickel slick republicans who rather take him down than do there jobs.

---

So then the Republicans are really Liberalish for not hammering the left any harder than they have?

No, the right is a slave to the corporate masters who have no concept of doing, or considering anything but the masters interest. Republicans and conservatives are but the overseers of the slave mentality, that keeps corporations in power.