Women in the Work Force: Critical Issues
http://thedianerehmshow.org/shows/2011-03-24/women-work-force-critical-issues
American women have made significant strides in the workplace. But they still lag behind men in pay and advancement. Those issues are at the heart of a job discrimination lawsuit against Wal-Mart. Next week the U.S. Supreme Court will begin hearing arguments on aspects of the case, which could affect more than a million women. In the next hour, we'll talk with three women - a lawyer, an economist and a journalist - each with a different generation's perspective on gender equality in employment. And we'll explore why workplace flexibility has become increasingly important for both men and women.
Guests
Heather Boushey
senior economist at the Center for American Progress.
Marcia Greenberger
founder and co-president of the National Women's Law Center.
Hannah Seligson
journalist and author of "New Girl on the Job."
Comments
Please familiarize yourself with our Code of Conduct and Terms of Use before posting your comments.
The legislation that lead to the 2008 housing bubble began as far as the "1977 Reinvestment Act" which made banks loan money in poor areas. This was done to avoid the finger of being labeled discrimination. Before this Banks required a 10% down payment for Conventional loans. In 1996 under Secretary of Housing Henry Cisneros this law was fast forwarded to get more more low income people into homes. Lending institutions in order to get funds for high risk loans had to find ways by creative financing for investors. In the meantime the government under Henry were telling these lending institutions they would insure these loans. This is where the greed started to take place. Fannie Mae & Freddie Mac are partly government owned and insured many loans. Frank Raines a good buddy of Obama ran one of these organizations for six years and had a buy out bonus of 75 millions when it was brought up by McCain. Even in August 0f 2008 Rep. Barney Franks said these programs were solvent.
On local radio around this time, real estate shows were stating about getting people in with 0 down and 100% financing. This bubble would have never taken place if money was lent to a good part of the population that does not save or are bad risks.
All those environmental requirement do hurt Chinese Farmers.
1.Think your datapoint thread is dead wrong as stated by Joint Committee.
http://www.house.gov/jec/fiscal/tx-grwth/reagtxct/reagtxct.htm.
To save you the time, I will give you a brief synopsis.
" The share of the income tax burden borne by the top 10 percent of taxpayers increased from 48.0 percent in 1981 to 57.2 percent in 1988. Meanwhile, the share of income taxes paid by the bottom 50 percent of taxpayers dropped from 7.5 percent in 1981 to 5.7 percent in 1988"
2. Did not even waste my time looking up Mother Jones and David Corn. This left bias magazine is not worth the paper it is written on.
All those environmental requirement do squeeze profit margins for Chinese Farmers.
http://www2.timesdispatch.com/lifestyles/2010/apr/03/i-walm0301_20100401...
The benefits of Walmart for Chinese Farmers
http://www.chinacsr.com/en/2009/11/24/6646-wal-mart-benefits-chinese-far...
Your reference to how much of the overall income tax the rich pay is meaningless without context. What you are afraid to admit is that the amount rich people pay as a percentage of individual income when you add up total federal taxes is lower than what the poor pay, and had been since the tax cuts of the 1980s. Warren Buffet, one of the two or three richest people in the United States has admitted publicly (in fact you can find it on Youtube) that he pays only 15% of his income in taxes, in line with the tax bracket of the very poorest for income tax, but then poor people still pay a greater portion of income because of things like payroll tax.
You tax information from the 1980's does not reflect current rates.
Also, you can try to attack my sources if you want, but if you look closely you will find that they are essentially passing on statistics freely available and directly from various parts of the federal government. The rest of the information is from peer reviewed economic research.
@meangreen
There is nothing in the timesdispatch article does not back up your statment. If anything it shows that china and walmart are being forced to confront the environmental damage, and they have changed environmental policies because they see that it will cost less in the long run.
If it can be show that the plans described in the article from Chinacsr.com were actually made real, and had the intended benefit, then good for Wal-mart for doing the right thing by someone, but people can say anything they want, until there is hard economic data to back up the claims they don't amount to much.
In any case neither of these articles deals with the reality that the rich are increasing their incomes while the incomes of poor people either grow more slowly or actually shrink in terms adjusted for inflation, and in American the rich are taxed at a lower overall rate then the poor as a percentage of total individual income.
Ramaem:
The Federal Income Tax is lower for the rich as a percentage of what middle class pay. But the problem is and what Mr Buffet did not state is that the rich pay pay more when you include State Income Tax. Nebraska has a low state income tax and a surplus in it coffers. This is where they get taken to the cleaners or as they say in South Texas they get "the big chorizo". Take a look at what the rich pay in NE states and the left coast on "total income" when you include State & Federal Taxes. There is no discrimination between Federal and State Taxes and how those revenues are used.
Now to get to the payroll tax that poor people pay. If they pay any at all, they get it back at the end of the year (Earned Income), a Nixon creation.
In what way does my info reflect from 80's? Even Ezra Klien from Washington Post state that 47% do not pay income tax.
The reason I disavowed your info from that datapoint site is because info is left out like in 1918 when Federal Income Tax was created it was only 1% of total income. Wish it was like then now
The 47% statistic you site here was not cited in your previous posts. In any case this statistic is for 2009 when there was a one time tax credit was paid out due to economic hardship from the recession and financial collapse. Only about 10% of people nation wide pay no Federal tax of any kind, and the poor and middle class still pay more as a percentage of income in taxes than the rich.
The rich are much freer shirk their part of tax burden and move to Nebraska or even better Texas where there is no state income tax, or just to move profits from their companies over sees where the are out of reach of state or federal tax at all.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/25/business/economy/25tax.html?scp=2&sq=g...
GE Just got a multibillion dollar tax credit, and paid no tax at all to the federal government.
?????????????????????
Everyone look smart son,Christian Sandals Heels,christian louboutin slingbacks saleChristian Loubo, I was outsmarted life