hiit:

How is that ironic? Seems like the expected cause and effect...

It's ironic because the democrats are harping on income inequality, yet they can't even get their own houses in order. So it makes their end goal obvious, take from people who disagree with them and give it to those who agree.
Follow the shit your fellow monkeys say @shitWSOsays Life is hard, it's even harder when you're stupid - John Wayne
 

eh? Assuming American elections and government sector works like most countries, I'm not sure how you think things work.

If their end goal is take from the wealthy (republicans?) and give to those who agree with them (districts like these) and they had achieved that end to some degree after having 2 terms of a Democrat president at Federal level, wouldn't the gini coefficient in Democrat neighbourhoods be lower, not higher?

Those who can, do. Those who can't, post threads about how to do it on WSO.
 

If you harp on something constantly that you want to change (income inequality) people should rightly assume that the areas you represent should have below average instances of the said problem. However in this case this is egg on the faces of the democrats who go around claiming this is the worst thing since the last talking point when they can't even get their own houses in line with having an acceptable income inequality distribution.

How can you fix something for everyone when you cant even fix it for a few.

Follow the shit your fellow monkeys say @shitWSOsays Life is hard, it's even harder when you're stupid - John Wayne
 
heister:
How can you fix something for everyone when you cant even fix it for a few.

I think that's because the tools you need to fix these problems with aren't handed out on district representation levels. They come with state and federal power.

Those who can, do. Those who can't, post threads about how to do it on WSO.
 

I think I see the point you're trying to make, but I think you need more information to support it.

Voting at a district level alone doesn't determine how that district is governed at a state or federal level eg those most Democrat state or federal district may sit in a Republican state and be subject to Republican state policies. So the "getting your house in order" argument doesn't seem to add up.

Wouldn't the more meaningful approach be to measure Gini coefficient of Democrat states after multi-term Democrat governance, and/or the same at a Federal level?

Those who can, do. Those who can't, post threads about how to do it on WSO.
 

Yes, most of those districts are in democratic strongholds some have even had consistent democratic rule for over 50 years at all levels of government.

The real point is, democrats don't actually care about income inequality. It just happens to be the talking point that tested the highest for emotional effect.

Follow the shit your fellow monkeys say @shitWSOsays Life is hard, it's even harder when you're stupid - John Wayne
 
heister:
The real point is, democrats don't actually care about income inequality. It just happens to be the talking point that tested the highest for emotional effect.

So are you saying they don't actually do anything about redistribution ie they do not "take from people who disagree with them and give it to those who agree"?

Those who can, do. Those who can't, post threads about how to do it on WSO.
 

No one cares about helping poor and uneducated people. The reality is many of these people get this way because of poor choices. Dropping out of school, having children early one, committing crimes, etc. All condemn people to working these poor paying jobs.

You want to fix income inequality? Take away personal choice. Force people to attend school in a polite manner, do not allow them to have children until 25-30 and mandate hard work and you'll see inequality drop like a lead weight.

 

I don't think this provides the "egg on the face" argument you hoped. As others pointed out, you don't have the evidence to separate cause and effect.

I do, however, think this provides some insight into the goals of voters in these areas. Democrats aren't likely winning on abortion, immigration, climate change, gay rights, women's rights, defense, etc. They are winning on a platform of wealth redistribution.

 

Not sure why you guys are spinning your wheels. The people spending their time harping on income inequality suck at reducing it. That's the case on a federal level, too. I'm not saying we shouldn't discuss the "why," but I think that's the point.

As for how this puts egg on their face, it doesn't, because they have no self awareness. But when you had the War on Poverty and the Great Society, when you do all of this handwringing and have nothing to show for it, regardless of whether you think that 'proves' anything, yeah, you screwed up. Either from supporting failed policies or not getting your shit together with good policy. Of course, these are politicians we're talking about.

 

Quo assumenda dolores ut iure saepe voluptatem pariatur. Accusantium corporis tempore molestiae doloribus commodi autem sint. Ea earum et sequi tenetur atque vel. Non rerum quis consectetur nobis quas. Sunt quos ipsa doloremque.

Voluptas est ea consequatur consequatur eius consequuntur. Eos repellat ratione sed et voluptas ut aut. Animi et aut ab et. Et suscipit ut et iste sint maiores architecto et.

Career Advancement Opportunities

May 2024 Investment Banking

  • Jefferies & Company 02 99.4%
  • Goldman Sachs 19 98.8%
  • Harris Williams & Co. New 98.3%
  • Lazard Freres 02 97.7%
  • JPMorgan Chase 04 97.1%

Overall Employee Satisfaction

May 2024 Investment Banking

  • Harris Williams & Co. 18 99.4%
  • JPMorgan Chase 10 98.8%
  • Lazard Freres 05 98.3%
  • Morgan Stanley 07 97.7%
  • William Blair 03 97.1%

Professional Growth Opportunities

May 2024 Investment Banking

  • Lazard Freres 01 99.4%
  • Jefferies & Company 02 98.8%
  • Goldman Sachs 17 98.3%
  • Moelis & Company 07 97.7%
  • JPMorgan Chase 05 97.1%

Total Avg Compensation

May 2024 Investment Banking

  • Director/MD (5) $648
  • Vice President (19) $385
  • Associates (87) $260
  • 3rd+ Year Analyst (14) $181
  • Intern/Summer Associate (33) $170
  • 2nd Year Analyst (67) $168
  • 1st Year Analyst (205) $159
  • Intern/Summer Analyst (146) $101
notes
16 IB Interviews Notes

“... there’s no excuse to not take advantage of the resources out there available to you. Best value for your $ are the...”

Leaderboard

1
redever's picture
redever
99.2
2
Betsy Massar's picture
Betsy Massar
99.0
3
Secyh62's picture
Secyh62
99.0
4
BankonBanking's picture
BankonBanking
99.0
5
dosk17's picture
dosk17
98.9
6
GameTheory's picture
GameTheory
98.9
7
CompBanker's picture
CompBanker
98.9
8
kanon's picture
kanon
98.9
9
Kenny_Powers_CFA's picture
Kenny_Powers_CFA
98.8
10
numi's picture
numi
98.8
success
From 10 rejections to 1 dream investment banking internship

“... I believe it was the single biggest reason why I ended up with an offer...”