Class Income Warfare : A Wedge Issues by Progressives

Proof again that the Democrats are using income disparity between classes as a wedge issue to bring the two groups into conflict. Class warfare is not new to the progressive Democrats as they have used it in almost every election in memory.

The difference now is we have a sitting president that is willfully using class conflict as a tool to divide the country and thereby instigating an agenda that is out right Marxist in nature to gain control of a majority of the voting population. His idea is to develop a class of needy and dependent individuals that the progressive socialist left Democrats can use, and abuse, as they see fit to gain power.

May societies through out history have tried this and failed, and as a consequence the entire population of these failed societies became useless pawns to progressive ambitions. The results, of course, took generations to fix and some never recovered.

The question now, will we be one of the failures that could never recover, or if we can change this nightmare scenario, how long will it take, how many generations into the future? This November, be aware of history and the consequences of not taking responsibility for future generations.

Economic Gain Not Zero-Sum Game
Source: Veronique de Rugy, "For Richer and For Poorer," Reason Magazine, February

In making the argument that the income gap is an ever-widening disparity, many economists point to studies of the progress of the rich and the poor over the previous decade. The narrative portrayed by these studies paints the picture of an economic pie that is increasingly dominated by a small few at the expense of the public at large, says Veronique de Rugy, senior research fellow at the Mercatus Center at George Mason University.

However, this perspective precludes the fact that economic gain is not a zero-sum game, and that
greater wealth for the wealthiest does not eliminate the possibility of higher incomes for the poor.
Even though lower earners have a smaller share of income today than they did in 1990, their absolute income is higher.

According to IRS statistics the bottom 50 percent of income earners reported 15 percent of real adjust gross income (AGI) in 1990 ($517 billion), while they reported only 12 percent of AGI in 2007, but this percentage amounted to more absolute dollars -- $1.1 trillion.

This speaks to the logical argument that a smaller slice of a larger economic pie can still yield significantly more income for lower earners.

Furthermore, traditional statistics about the income gap ignore the dynamic nature of income mobility in the U.S. economy. While studies point to the increased income share of top earners between two time periods, they ignore the fact that it is often not the same people earning large incomes over time -- the top 1 percent in 1990 are not necessarily the same people as the top 1 percent in 2012.

Using IRS data, the Tax Foundation has shown that of the 675,000 taxpayers who reported $1 million in income at some point between 1999 and 2007, only about half remained millionaires just one year later. A tiny 6 percent, or 38,000 people, retained their millionaire status for all nine years.

Meanwhile, 60 percent of households that were in the lowest income quintile in 1999 had moved to a higher quintile by 2007. Furthermore, about one-third of those in the lowest quintile moved to the middle quintile or higher.