The Conservative Cave
Current Events => Politics => Topic started by: sargentodiaz on March 19, 2015, 11:42:01 AM
-
(http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y164/wteach/Another/26CC035900000578-3002161-The_gap_between_the_rich_and_poor_in_big_cities_in_the_United_St-a-5_1426761098395_zpsrdn9yslx.jpg)
… are these the cities with the biggest inequality? Anybody notice which way they lean and who's in charge of them?
Read the story @ http://rightwingnews.com/liberals/strange-income-inequality-in-big-cities-which-tend-to-lean-democrat-continues-to-grow/
-
They want the issue, not the solution.
-
Women don't need as much money. Men buy them drinks, take them out to dinner, to the movies, vacations....etc....etc.... :-)
I will be hiding in the hills for the next week. :-)
-
I "get" the point, but there are some oddities in the cities chosen.
On the West Coast, Seattle and Portland are noticeable omissions. In CA, LA is a natural choice, being the largest city in CA, but SF is only the 4th largest; what about San Diego and San Jose, the 2nd and 3rd largest CA cities?
Mesa, AZ's 3rd largest city, is shown, but not Phoenix and Tucson, the largest and 2nd largest?
Colorado Springs is shown but not Denver? Dallas is shown but not Houston? Neither KC nor St. Louis are shown? Detroit? Philadelphia? Savannah?
I would not at all be surprised if including those cities confirmed and emphasized the pattern, but omissions that obvious create an appearance of selectivity.
-
I'm not sure I know what "income equality" is in the real world of economics. I subscribe to the notion that the person choosing to be employed is 100% in control of The amount of compensation she or he is willing to accept in exchange for her or his time and talents.