Inequality Troubles Americans Across Party Lines, Times/CBS Poll Finds

[peecoolyour]

Americans are broadly concerned about inequality of wealth and income despite an economy that has improved by most measures, a sentiment that is already driving the 2016 presidential contest, according to a New York Times/CBS News poll.

The poll found that a strong majority say that wealth should be more evenly divided and that it is a problem that should be addressed urgently. Nearly six in 10 Americans said government should do more to reduce the gap between the rich and the poor, but they split sharply along partisan lines. Only one-third of Republicans supported a more active government role, versus eight in 10 of Democrats.

These findings help explain the populist appeals from politicians of both parties, but particularly Democrats, who are seeking to capitalize on the sense among Americans that the economic recovery is benefiting only a handful at the very top.

Far from a strictly partisan issue, inequality looms large in the minds of almost half of Republicans and two-thirds of independents, suggesting that it will outlive the presidential primary contests and become a central theme in next year’s general election campaign.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/04/business/inequality-a-major-issue-for-americans-times-cbs-poll-finds.html

[pampango]

1. Favor fast track? Democrats: Yes-63%, No-32%. republicans: No-72%, Yes-27%.

The problem with republicans is that the solutions to inequality require government action, e.g. progressive taxes, support for strong unions, an effective safety net. They oppose all of them.

[PETRUS]

2. Not only that.

Yes government can fix it, but government also created it. The sort of inequality we experience is due to government. Not everyone appreciates this; some think current wealth inequality (not to mention "the market" itself) are somehow natural.

[brentspeak]

3. You made up those numbers?

Because they're not in the NYT poll.

Despite your claim that you "support strong unions", your support for job-sucking "free trade" bull$hit deals is proof that you are most certainly not in favor of any kind of unions.

[peecoolyour]

4. Yep. It actually says more than HALF of Americans were against giving the President trade authority.

And two-thirds favored some form of trade restrictions.

[pampango]

6. Yep. Opposed is 55%. In favor is 42%. Opposed comes from 72% of R's, 61% of Indies and 32% of D's.

The 42% support comes from 63% of Democrats, 35% of independents and 27% of republicans.

It was not surprising that 78% said they had heard or read not much (30%) or nothing (48%) about TPP. It was odd that after 20 years, 63% did not know enough about NAFTA to express an opinion. Of the minority that expressed an opinion about NAFTA, 22% favored it (24% of Democrats) and 14% were opposed (13% of Democrats).

[pampango]

5. Click on the link in the NYT article. That takes you to the poll itself. Scroll down to the question

Do you favor or oppose giving the president authority to negotiate international trade deals that Congress can only approve or disapprove, but not change?

Right underneath that is the composite poll result: 42% in favor, 55% opposed. If you let the cursor over over the 'favor' and 'opposed', it provides the partisan breakdown. If you come up with different figures, let me know.

Here is the link in the article that takes you to the poll:

The poll found that a strong majority say that wealth should be more evenly divided and that it is a problem that should be addressed urgently.

Despite your claim that you "support strong unions", your support for job-sucking "free trade" bull$hit deals is proof that you are most certainly not in favor of any kind of unions.

By that logic, republicans are great union supporters because they oppose fast track and TPP.

FDR and Truman lowered tariffs and set up the International Trade Organization and GATT. Were they also "not in favor of any kind of unions?" That's a bit of 'new' Democrat thinking.

Every progressive country in the world has more 'free trade' agreements and much more trade in general than the US has. And they have much, much stronger unions than we have. Strong unions and trade go together. Just as FDR and Truman would have predicted.

What modern progressive countries do differently than the US (which would make FDR and Truman smile and nod their heads) is progressive taxes, legal and popular support for strong unions, funding an effective safety net and effective regulation of businesses.

[brentspeak]

8. You seem to enjoy piling on bull$hit

It fits you like a glove.

In your never-ending attempts at appealing to forum members here by linking today's corporate pro-"free trade" deals with Democratic icons such as FDR, you've polluted this site for years with tales of FDR's presumed approval for corporate-written free trade such as NAFTA and now TPP -- as if today's "free trade in name only" deals are in any way comparable to the free trade legislation and economic circumstances of FDR's time.

Apparently, you're under the impression that if you keep repeating the same lies concerning FDR and Truman, those lies will somehow stick, and the innocent reader here who might stumble upon your posts will actually believe your propaganda that NAFTA, TPP, CAFTA, etc. and the whole corrupt slew of job-killing and corporation-empowering would have been things that FDR and Truman approved of. You also curiously keep failing to note that US unions are overwhelmingly opposed to today's free trade deals. Further, European unions are opposed to the new "free trade" deals. Why do you continue with the bull$hit that you're some sort of comrade-in-arms with union members?

For the benefit of the unsuspecting reader who might stumble upon pampango's propaganda here on DU;

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1014&pid=659610

Primers on FDR and the old-school Democrats views actual views of free trade (in short, FDR and the others would have been repelled and horrified by today's NAFTA, CAFTA, KORUS, and TPP):

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=6669455

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4433420

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4437688

(And, yes, I did locate the statistic about the difference in opinion concerning polled Democrats and Republicans on fast-track. The same poll also demonstrated Democratic disapproval of free trade deals, and more importantly, how little about TPP they and the rest of the public even know about the legislation, let alone have seen it discussed on the news. Your repeated attempts at appealing to forum members here by also highlighting and exaggerating supposed differences in "trade" between Democrats and Republicans continue to fall flat.)

[pampango]

9. I don't consider posting poll results as "piling on bull$hit". If you do, ignore them

and continue to live in a poll-free environment where all liberals agree with you.

FDR's presumed approval for corporate-written free trade such as NAFTA and now TPP ...

All I have posted about FDR trade policy were 2 things. One is that he lowered tariffs in his first and second terms to reverse the republican policy of high tariffs and limited trade that he inherited from Coolidge and Hoover. republicans howled about these lower tariffs in the presidential election campaigns of 1936 and 1940. FDR did not back down and even came up with a bigger, more liberal trade idea in 1944.

Secondly, in his third term he proposed the International Treaty Organization in 1944 with GATT as a temporary mechanism to liberalize trade until the ITO came into existence. I make no attempt to pretend to know what FDR would have thought of NAFTA or TPP unlike some people who KNOW he would have "repelled and horrified".

What I DO KNOW is that FDR and Truman believed in large international trade organizations (the ITO had 53 signatory countries) whose rules and enforcement procedures were determined and implemented by all nations not just unilaterally by the US. I also KNOW that FDR and Truman supported GATT (which became the WTO) because it was part of the FDR's ITO proposal and Truman approved GATT by executive order, largely because he thought the republican congress would have shot it down. I think one can reasonably infer support from that.

For the benefit of the unsuspecting reader who might stumble upon pampango's propaganda here on DU;

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1014&pid=659610

I do have to smile that you go to the trouble to keep a record of my posts in order to enlighten "unsuspecting readers".

I happen to believe that the policies of FDR and Truman are relevant today despite the different "economic circumstances of FDR's time". ("Economic circumstances" were much worse then as I'm sure you know.) I understand that you would prefer that I not post about FDR's trade and other policies but I cannot accommodate you there.

[lovemydog]

7. I'm really glad about this. We must fix it and soon.

I don't believe all republican voters are our enemy. Whenever possible we should be compassionate and help try and get them to understand things too. I know, easier said than done. But I'm very encouraged that so many are seeing this as a problem. I hope a lot of republicans and independents consider voting for democrats. Democrats have stronger solutions to reducing inequality than most republican politicians. Also, beyond the political world, I hope a lot of business leaders and people who can increase wages. The solutions to inequality extend beyond just the political world and everyone should become involved in reducing it.