Income Inequality

[TulsaMoon]

I had a heated conversation during the debates the other night about something that Rand Paul said. If you want less income inequality move to a state with a Republican Mayor or a Republican Governor. The person I watched the debates with is a hard core Democrat (but we are still friends) and I myself lean more to the right of center. He started ranting that Rand Paul was off his rocker and Democrats are by far more fair than any conservative would ever dream of being. So, I did a little research and I will post it here for you to bash/agree/disagree and or call me names. At the bottom I will add the link where I found my facts.

The most equal and unequal cities.

MOST UNEQUAL


Atlanta  -          Mayor Kasim Reed-        DEMOCRAT

San Francisco - Mayor Ed Lee-                DEMOCRAT

Boston MA        Mayor Marty Walsh -       DEMOCRAT

Miami FL -        Mayor Tomas Regalado - REPUBLICAN

Washington DC Mayor Muriel Bowser       DEMOCRAT

NYC NY            Mayor De Blasio              DEMOCRAT

Dallas              Mayor Mike Rawlings       DEMOCRAT

Chicago           Mayor Rahm Emanual      DEMOCRAT

LA                   Mayor Eric Garcetti          DEMOCRAT

Minneapolis     Mayor Betsy Hodges         DEMOCRAT


MOST EQUAL CITIES

Albuquerque      Mayor Richard Berry       REPUBLICAN

Columbus Oh     Mayor Michael Coleman  DEMOCRAT

Raleigh NC        Mayor Nancy McFarland   INDEPENDANT

Las Vegas         Mayor Carolyn Goodman  DEMOCRAT

Nashville           Mayor Megan Berry         DEMOCRAT

Arlington           Mayor Robert Cluck         REPUBLICAN

OKC                  Mayor Mick Cornett         REPUBLICAN

Mesa AZ            Mayor Scott Smith          REPUBLICAN

Colorado Springs Mayor Steve Bach         REPUBLICAN

Virginia Beach     Mayor Will Sessoms      REPUBLICAN


Nine of the ten most unequal cities are run by Democrats

Seven of ten of the most equal cities are run by Republicans and one by an independent.

If the Democrats are the party of equality and the Republicans are not (according to my friend) why doesn't it show where it counts most?

This continued rant about the rich get richer under Republicans and the poor do better under Democrats is a lie in my opinion. If I am the party of " you hate the lower class " show me in numbers as I have here where that is correct.

Also for those that scream about the rich stock market CEO's, they make more money under Democrats than Republicans. The Stock Market does better under a Democrat ( 9.7% ) on average than a Republican ( 6.7% ) on average. I myself like this part about Democrats. But to hear them talk about the evil Stock Market and the evil CEO's makes me want to puke.

CNN - http://money.cnn.com/2015/10/28/investing/stock-market-democrats-republicans/

Brookings - http://www.brookings.edu/research/reports2/2015/03/city-inequality-berube-holmes

[Conan71]

I don't know that it has as much to do with the administrations of the cities, but rather you have some cities on the "most unequal" where there are huge pockets of wealth relative to other cities around the country.  I can only guess that the large union bases and melting pot of minorities in NYC, Chicago, Boston, and DC are the reason for Democrat mayors.  Dallas, LA, Miami, Atlanta, and SF have decent sized immigrant and minority populations.  Of course, pair up large populations of working class citizens against the mega-wealthy who live in those cities, there's going to be a good contrast.  I'm really surprised Houston didn't make the list of most unequal due to all the oil wealth in the area and large immigrant population.

Personally, I'm surprised anyone is still taken in by the political promises of "prosperity for everyone" or "economic justice". 

Any time that has been tried, the poor stay poor and end up exploited worse than they were before or they became permanent wards of the state.

[carltonplace]

The poor need to find some used boot straps and then pull them selves up to be trickled down upon.

[cannon_fodder]

Mayors have very little to do with economic disparity among their citizens. They set limited tax policy, limited role in education (particularly higher education), have a limited impact on the economy, etc. etc. etc.

But, for better or worse, it is strange that the economy almost always does better under Democratic presidents. The stock market (18 times higher under Democrats), corporate profits (12% rise under Democrats, 4.5% decline under Republicans), CEO and workers wages (disposable income rises 6 times faster under Democrats), unemployment, GDP growth (7 times more growth), the deficit (250% less debt under Democrats)... all are improve when Democrats are in the White House. One or two presidents can be a fluke or just timing. But when you look at 80-90 years of presidencies the trend is crazy.

I would not have predicted a significant disparity. Correlation v. causation? Is 80-90 years a significant sample? No idea. But the disparity is just huge.

[TulsaMoon]

Mayors have very little to do with economic disparity among their citizens. They set limited tax policy, limited role in education (particularly higher education), have a limited impact on the economy, etc. etc. etc.

But, for better or worse, it is strange that the economy almost always does better under Democratic presidents. The stock market (18 times higher under Democrats), corporate profits (12% rise under Democrats, 4.5% decline under Republicans), CEO and workers wages (disposable income rises 6 times faster under Democrats), unemployment, GDP growth (7 times more growth), the deficit (250% less debt under Democrats)... all are improve when Democrats are in the White House. One or two presidents can be a fluke or just timing. But when you look at 80-90 years of presidencies the trend is crazy.

I would not have predicted a significant disparity. Correlation v. causation? Is 80-90 years a significant sample? No idea. But the disparity is just huge.

City Government must have a huge influence upon this. Take Texas for instance. Dallas is listed as 7th in the most unequal but Arlington list listed as 6th most equal. If you break down the list as a State you find that the most unequal is 5 Republicans and 5 Democrats (Governors). Whereas the most equal is 8 Republicans and 2 Democrats (Governors). Now if you take a list of the most unequal States the list changes to show Republicans as the worst.

10. Connecticut Democrat
Top 20% annual household income: Greater than $138,034
Bottom 20% annual household income: Less than $26,599
Income inequality factor: 5.19

9. California Democrat
Top 20%: Greater than $124,936
Bottom 20%: Less than $23,980
Income inequality factor: 5.21

8. New Jersey Republican
Top 20%: Greater than $141,057
Bottom 20%: Less than $27,002
Income inequality factor: 5.22

7. (tie) New Mexico Republican
Top 20%: Greater than $90,478
Bottom 20%: Less than $16,927
Income inequality factor: 5.35

7. (tie) Alabama Republican
Top 20%: Greater than $88,967
Bottom 20%: Less than $16,625
Income inequality factor: 5.35


5. Mississippi Republican
Top 20%: Greater than $79,596
Bottom 20%: Less than $14,509
Income inequality factor: 5.49

4. Massachusetts Republican
Top 20%: Greater than $134,004
Bottom 20%: Less than $24,181
Income inequality factor: 5.54

3. New York Democrat
Top 20%: Greater than $120,906
Bottom 20%: Less than $21,159
Income inequality factor: 5.71

2. Louisiana Republican
Top 20%: Greater than $94,740
Bottom 20%: Less than $16,322
Income inequality factor: 5.8

1. District of Columbia Democrat
Top 20%: Greater than $151,132
Bottom 20%: Less than $20,151
Income inequality factor: 7.5

So again I have to say that the city itself must have influence upon this in a much larger fashion than thought. Cities from the same State are on both sides of the list.


Per your second point.

I think the largest increase was Ford? I thought I read that somewhere. The disparity is huge as you say and I can't really put my finger on why, but I am not educated enough to even speculate as to why. My point remains though. Stocks and CEO's do MUCH better under Democrats, the wealthy see even more coin and the inequality widens and the continued lies still fly. Again, educate me where I am wrong here. I have a very open mind.

[cannon_fodder]

Please explain to me how a mayor can influence the income disparity of his/her citizens. I just don't see the cause and effect.

They can help with quality of life between classes: parks, schools, mass transit, etc. But not really income. Particularly short term (less than 10 years).

[Conan71]

Please explain to me how a mayor can influence the income disparity of his/her citizens. I just don't see the cause and effect.

They can help with quality of life between classes: parks, schools, mass transit, etc. But not really income. Particularly short term (less than 10 years).

It's really as simple as I posted.  Look at the top ten with the most inequality.  It's a metric which is going to look worse in places where the mega wealthy live or there are large corporate headquarters and lots of worker bees, especially where the population is in the millions.

[swake]

Cities in metro areas don't actually have distinct economies. The integrated metro area is the economic unit.

It would also be easy to show that wealthier metros and wealthier states are blue.

[TulsaMoon]

Please explain to me how a mayor can influence the income disparity of his/her citizens. I just don't see the cause and effect.

They can help with quality of life between classes: parks, schools, mass transit, etc. But not really income. Particularly short term (less than 10 years).

CF... I can't explain why. I don't know why. But I see a difference in cities. The only thing I can point to is the government in power at a local level. I am only asking these things to be better educated myself. I was hoping more info could be obtained through the research that I know most of you do and the opinions here as well. Conan may have a point.

The State with the largest increase % to the upper half is Wyoming. That could be because there is about 4 people that live there (born and raised there myself), could be the oil boom, coal production. Many factors. But Wyoming top income earners rose 200%.. May things effect this I think and I am not sure it can be boiled down.