• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

income inequality debate

The transaction is "free" but if the purpose is to gain political favor it's illustrative of a non-free market.
 
bmoneydeac said:
The transaction is "free" but if the purpose is to gain political favor it's illustrative of a non-free market.
Click to expand...

So where does Citizens United fit into this? I find it weird that conservatives get up in arms about a free market transaction that is at least on the surface apolitical, but support purely political "free speech" using money.
 
I'd guess a libertarian like knowell would be strongly against CU but he could confirm.
 
bmoneydeac said:
The transaction is "free" but if the purpose is to gain political favor it's illustrative of a non-free market.
Click to expand...

no, it is not. the purpose of the transaction has nothing to do with it.

can i give a speech? can i get paid for it? is there regulation that dictates how much and in way i get paid.

those are the relevant questions
 
Inequality in higher education

http://www.npr.org/2015/08/22/43373...ign=npr&utm_term=nprnews&utm_content=20150822

Yesterday, I tweeted from a study that was done by this group called Nexus which calculated the per student annual taxpayer contribution for different kinds of educational institutions in this country — so, the value of all of the money taxpayers give institutions. For the typical community college in this country, it comes out to [between $2,000 and] $4,000 per student per year. For a typical state school, it's $10,000 per year. For Harvard, it's $48,000 per year. For Yale, it's $69,000 per student per year. And for Princeton, it's $105,000 per student per year of taxpayer subsidy.
Click to expand...
 
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/15/o...destroys-black-wealth.html?smid=tw-share&_r=1

Despite being better qualified financially, black and Latino testers were shown fewer homes than their white peers, were often denied information about special incentives that would have made the purchase easier, and were required to produce loan pre-approval letters and other documents when whites were not.
Moreover, real estate agents enforced residential and school segregation by steering home buyers into neighborhoods based on race. Whites were encouraged to live where the schools were mainly white; African-Americans where schools were disproportionately black; and Latinos where schools were disproportionately Latino.
Click to expand...
 
Discussion of the legacy of housing segregation on Diane Rehm right now.
 
http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2015/12/09/the-american-middle-class-is-losing-ground/

ST_2015-12-09_middle-class-03.png
 
That chart by itself isn't a bad thing at all. More people moved higher than moved lower.
 
PhDeac said:
That chart by itself isn't a bad thing at all. More people moved higher than moved lower.
Click to expand...
We grew by 50% during that time frame as far as population goes as well. Here are the rough raw numbers based on those percentages using total population (assuming kids mirror adults in those households). Also consider that our foreign born population was 9.7m in 1970, and is now 42m....many of which are in the bottom 2 bins.

iwm693.jpg
 
Here's with just the adult population which is what was used in those percentages. We're much older now than in 1970.

mkci0n.jpg
 
Here's a different illustration of that earlier chart.

d823a614-9e82-11e5-b45d-4812f209f861.img
 
Do not most Hispanic immigrants arrive with nothing?
 
http://news.wfu.edu/2016/02/03/wfu-research-inspires-super-bowl-ads/

“The father-daughter relationship is crucial for the development of strong daughters. Though it would be easy to focus on the daughters’ beauty, the campaign’s emphasis on strength is a huge compliment to my scholarship.”

I wonder if this Professor is on to something we can incorporate into our poverty initiatives...
 
jhmd2000 said:
http://news.wfu.edu/2016/02/03/wfu-research-inspires-super-bowl-ads/

“The father-daughter relationship is crucial for the development of strong daughters. Though it would be easy to focus on the daughters’ beauty, the campaign’s emphasis on strength is a huge compliment to my scholarship.”

I wonder if this Professor is on to something we can incorporate into our poverty initiatives...
Click to expand...
And a great way to stay dry outside is to wish away the rain with prayers and high hopes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top