the rich aren’t just grabbing a bigger slice of the income pie — they’re taking all of it.

[Centrist1984]

17. Majority of population didn't see it that way though

in my neck of the woods. They are remembered as the day the worker died. Once the air traffic controller union was busted wages started to sink for those of us that worked in the trades. The dot.com bubble bouyed the market but did nothing for the wages of the workers, the housing bubble did exactly what you see to date and the worker didn't make out like a bandit then either. They got the shaft.

Remember wages and incomes are not the same thing. Incomes per capita have continually increased since 1980, minus a few hiccups during recessions. Incomes are wages + benefits. The problem is that as healthcare costs have been spiraling out of control, it has caused wages to stall or even decline even though incomes overall have been increasing, because more and more of a person's income is being put towards their healthcare. I would not blame the decline of unionization for the decline of the worker, but that's a different discussion most likely.

During the Clinton years we had no wars to fund allowing people to feel that they were gaining and not just tossing money into the MIC money pit.

Not really sure how having no wars made a difference to people's standard of living.

That changed in November, 2000 with the selection of the shrub. suddenly the country needed a war, not only a war, but one where we had to cut social services in order to cut taxes and programs while spending billions.

How were social services cut? President Bush sizeable enlarged social services, as he signed what at the time was the largest expansion of government into healthcare in decades, the Medicare Prescription Drug Program (which is one of the first and only government programs in history to cost less than was projected). President Bush also doubled the Child Tax Credit from $500 to $1000 per child (it is because of the Bush tax cuts that about 40% ultimately do not pay federal income taxes). It was under Clinton that social services were cut, with welfare reform (which was supported also by the Republicans and the general public).

In my opinion, the large income gains by those who make up the richest in society are the result of tax cuts for the wealthy, and wars where they made out like bandits furnishing the weapons and war infrastructure.

Bush's tax cuts were for everybody, and the middle-class and poor received the largest percentage reductions. That is why after Obama got elected, the rhetoric to "End the Bush tax cuts" got subtly changed to "End the Bush tax cuts for those who make $250,000 and up..." the reason being because if they just ended the Bush tax cuts period, it would have meant raising taxes on everybody. The large increase in incomes for the richest brackets were due to the technology boom, financial boom, and associated booms in other industries as a result. Not all rich are involved in infrastructure or the military-industrial complex.

Those are my thoughts as a working tradesman, no more/no less.

btw, I see that the Donald wants to do away with employee pensions and healthcare at his casino in New Jersey. Why would he hate Americans enough to do that?

I don't know. Not much of a fan of Donald Trump though.