The extent of inequality in the US (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
May 01, 2024, 12:40:18 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  Economics (Moderator: Torie)
  The extent of inequality in the US (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: The extent of inequality in the US  (Read 4860 times)
Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.
Nathan
Moderators
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 34,430


« on: March 07, 2013, 11:46:14 AM »

Older people remember what it was like when the top marginal tax rate was 70%, and even middle class folks paid rates higher than the top marginal tax rate today. They remember what it was like when Big Government was completely out of control with inflation in the double-digits, unemployment in the double-digits, shortages for gasoline because of price ceilings, etc.

The reason why so many younger people favor increased taxation and more Big Government that taxes-and-spends like crazy is because they've yet to experience THEIR tax rates going through the roof to fund Big Government. If you think the tax increase that happened in January is where it ends, that is not the case if most Democrats get their way in the midterms next year. Congressional Republicans and the few remaining conservative Democrats are the only reason why we have yet to return to out-of-control Big Government reminiscent of what we saw in the 1970s.

What does any of that have to do with the subject of this thread?

That's the effect reality does to conservative hacks. They are unable to process it, so they crash and start mindlessly repeating irrelevant talking points.

Are you offering a way to change the current level of income distribution that does not involve more intervention from the government? The market is diverse and unbiased. There is no committee of politicians or bureaucrats deciding how income and wealth ends up being distributed. For better or worse, market forces have largely determined the current outcome. That is a heck of a lot more fair than crony committees determining who gets what with respect to resources.

My point is that more intervention will do more harm than good. The average person does not want to go back to Jimmy Carter's heyday just because "the top 1%" will only earn so much more than the average person due to excessive taxation on everybody. The average person would rather stick with the current level of income and wealth distribution than go back to being taxed to death and living with double-digit inflation.

The fact that you legitimately think that these are the only conceivable policy options is telling. You're a big fan of 1980, as a year in politics, in general, almost to the exclusion of other years.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.022 seconds with 12 queries.