Tax the rich

Jul 2013
53,015
56,589
Nashville, TN
#23
And that without significant regulation, an unfettered market economy would inevitably lead to a concentration of wealth among a shrinking few.
Coming back to the case of the US, it’s not enough just to do ex post re-distributions through income tax and transfer. That’s important, but that’s not going to be enough. When you see the kind of collapse of bottom 50% income that we’ve seen in the US in recent years, just to remind you some of the basic figures that we found with my colleagues Emmanuel Saez and Gabriel Zucman, as of 1980 the bottom 50% of the US adult population had about 20% of total income, as compared to less than 10% for the top 1% of the US population.

Now today it’s exactly the opposite, so the bottom 50% has gone from 20% to less than 10%, and the top 1% has gone from less than 10% to more than 20%, so the proportions of the trend are just incredible. When you have half of the US adult population that has twice as less income as 1% of the population, which means by the way that the average income by definition is less than … Well the average income, the top 1% is more than 100 times the income of the bottom 50%.
Inequality in Europe hasn’t risen nearly as fast as in the United States, despite their being somewhat similar.
It is somewhat similar, but it is less extreme in terms of rising inequality, largely because there are institutions in particular universal healthcare, universal funding of education services so that teachers are paid in the same manner, with the same tax manner wherever you live. Well this is an idealistic way of putting it, and it’s not quite like this, but as compared to inequality in excess to high quality education in the US, yes this is a bit more egalitarian in Europe, and this has contributed to the fact that the benefits of growth, the benefits of globalization have been a bit more spread out, a bit less concentrated to the top.
Now it was also partly for … Inequality was reduced through good policies like setting up a social security system, and welfare state or new deal type policy in the post-war era. The communist world, China and Russia in a way was an extreme point of this, with a huge reduction of inequality, probably excessive reduction of inequality, and in any case this came together with a sort of very absurd totalitarian system which was a gigantic failure.

At the end of the period, starting in the 1980s partly due to the failure of communism, which created after the fall of the Berlin Wall, I think this contributed to the fact that we entered a new era of sometime unlimited phase in the central regulation of markets, in financial liberalization. This is also something that started to happen in the 1980s, particularly in the US and the UK, partly because these two countries for internal political reasons were sort of reacting to the new dealer tradition. Partly also because in these countries some people had the feeling that they were being overtaken by Germany, by Japan, by other countries that had lost the war, and they felt they need to renew some kind of entrepreneurial spirit, sort of back to the 19th century capitalism.
Piketty explains why wealth inequality is challenging, but far from apocalyptic

I don't disagree with anything Piketty says here, do you?
 
Feb 2011
16,523
5,778
Boise, ID
#24
I can go along with Piketty at least insofar as acknowledging the pitfalls of any single country acting in isolation to go after its richest citizens or companies having effects that defeat the purpose of doing so.

Some people are so hate-filled with class war rhetoric that they would intentionally self-sabotage if it meant doing any damage to the perceived enemy. When you say "good riddance" at the thought of wealthy citizens and companies fleeing the country, you reveal yourself as a radical class war rhetoric subscriber.
 
Last edited:
Likes: orangecat
Jul 2014
35,570
9,324
midwest
#25
Right Wingers have not figured out that trickle down economics is a failure after almost 40 years of history. And, in fact, are still trying to make it work as deficits grow and wages stagnate. Even after one of its biggest boosters, Greenspan, admitted it was a failure. Here is a video of him saying it.

Yeah, the "New Green Deal" is the way to go, huh?

Ban domestic air travel and outlaw cows.

THAT will solve all our problems...
 
Jul 2013
53,015
56,589
Nashville, TN
#26
Yeah, the "New Green Deal" is the way to go, huh?

Ban domestic air travel and outlaw cows.

THAT will solve all our problems...
How about going back to Keynesian economics, that seemed to work pretty damn good for 50 years as the middle class grew more than anytime in history, na, we don't like that shit, it worked too good, lets stick with this shit that don't work...
 
Jul 2013
53,015
56,589
Nashville, TN
#27
I can go along with Piketty at least insofar as acknowledging the pitfalls of any single country acting in isolation to go after its richest citizens or companies having effects that defeat the purpose of doing so.

Some people are so hate-filled with class war rhetoric that they would intentionally self-sabotage if it meant doing any damage to the perceived enemy. When you say "good riddance" at the thought of wealthy citizens and companies fleeing the country, you reveal yourself as a radical class war rhetoric subscriber.
I share Jefferson's disdain for a "Landed Aristocracy" passing down fortunes from generation to generation in perpetuity without having to do a single day of honest work their entire lives and living in indolent luxury contributing nothing whatsoever to society. Having a corrupt ancestor 150 years ago that scammed the federal government out of 150 square miles of prime farmland and parlaying that theft into billions of dollars of wealth for the next 10 generations may seem fair to you, <shrug> but that is not what the founders had in mind.

There is also an artificial aristocracy founded on wealth and birth, without either virtue or talents; for with these it would belong to the first class. The natural aristocracy I consider as the most precious gift of nature for the instruction, the trusts, and government of society. And indeed it would have been inconsistent in creation to have formed man for the social state, and not to have provided virtue and wisdom enough to manage the concerns of the society. May we not even say that that form of government is the best which provides the most effectually for a pure selection of these natural aristoi into the offices of government? The artificial aristocracy is a mischievous ingredient in government, and provision should be made to prevent it's ascendancy.
Thomas Jefferson, on Aristocracy - letter to John Adams
 
Jul 2014
35,570
9,324
midwest
#28
How about going back to Keynesian economics, that seemed to work pretty damn good for 50 years as the middle class grew more than anytime in history, na, we don't like that shit, it worked too good, lets stick with this shit that don't work...
When cows are outlawed only outlaws will have cows.

You SURE AOC has a degree in Economics?
 
Jul 2013
53,015
56,589
Nashville, TN
#29
Teddy Roosevelt also shared my disdain of Trust Bunny Drones, he believed in a strong, progressive inheritance tax system. I have absolutely no problem with the Bill Gates and Warren Buffets of the country, they built their fortunes by working for them, not stealing them from their rich fathers like Trump.