Posted on 11/19/2012 6:03:29 AM PST by reaganaut1
WHETHER you’re in the 99 percent, the 47 percent or the 1 percent, inequality in America may threaten your future. Often decried for moral or social reasons, inequality imperils the economy, too; the International Monetary Fund recently warned that high income inequality could damage a country’s long-term growth. But the real menace for our long-term prosperity is not income inequality — it’s wealth inequality, which distorts access to economic opportunities.
Wealth inequality has worsened for two decades and is now at an extreme level. Replacing the income, estate and gift taxes with a progressive wealth tax would do much more to reduce it than any other tax plan being considered in Washington.
When economists try to measure inequality, they typically focus on income, because the data are most readily accessible. But income is not always a good gauge of economic power. Consider a group of people who all have high incomes but differ widely in their wealth. Who’s going to get into the country club? Who’s going to have the money to finance a new venture? Moreover, income data may not reveal the true economic power of people who are retired, or who receive their pay in securities like stocks and options or use complex strategies to avoid taxes.
Trends in the distribution of wealth can look very different from trends in incomes, because wealth is a measure of accumulated assets, not a flow over time. High earners add much more to their wealth every year than low earners. Over time, wealth inequality rises even as income inequality stays the same, and wealth inequality eventually becomes much more severe.
This is exactly what happened in the United States. A common statistical measure of inequality is the Gini coefficient, a number between 0 and 100 that rises with greater disparities.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
You might want to consider the recent election, its participants, and its outcome ... and then read Proverbs 26 in its entirety. I think it's a perfect description of the current American political scene.
When “you didn’t build that” was hot in the news,
I could not get a leftist to discuss what he policies he was trying to justify by stating that.
They simply denied that he was trying to justify policy, and was stating the concept that the society and infrastructure made success possible.
As for why he would state this (to justify a societal claim on the wealth of the successful), they would not even think about that, much less discuss it.
Perhaps those wealthy who are actually trying to good will get a waiver. Those involved in the green economy or those who support expanded female reproductive health services are most deserving.
God has given each of us different talents.
How we use these talents is dependent on each of us.
We are to be held accountable for our actions and inactions.
Communism is a lazy pipe-dream that ignores the reality of differences in each of our talents.
Thus the lazy take, but do not give.
The gullible give under pain of guilt from the lazy,
And thus there is NO Joy accrued to either the giver or the taker.
God loves a joyful giver.
There, fixed it.
Give no place hold for confiscation efforts
Oh yes, M2 Multipliers drop below 1 (Negative ROI)
New Investment, and hence, Employment, goes Bye-Bye
And Capitalism Fails.
When the economies move to a “World Bank”
Go Galt
I want me some Sulzberger fortune. Gimme gimme gimme!
I want me some Sulzberger fortune. Gimme gimme gimme!
Inflation is a very effective wealth tax.
If I remember correctly, Hillary broached this idea during her campaign. A classic way to make everyone “equal”. Don’t tax their earnings tax what they have.
When wealth inequality is achieved, we will all be equally poor. Congratulations, Libtards.
luckily they would have to pass a constitutional amendment to inact a weath tax :)
Here comes the retirement fund grabs! Those seniors who voted for O are gonna get a big wake up. As a class, they are the wealthiest americans in terms of assets (as they should be with their time on earth to earn those assets.) I hope they enjoy the pillaging of Medicare and their accumulated assets!
But putting them in the position to have to publicly fight it would be eye-opening if the TEA Party could get it covered (I hold no hope for Republicans doing anything but giving Dems cover).
Let’s collapse the economy and steal everything... exempting Soros, Buffett, Harvard and Yale of course.
If done properly it wouldn’t produce those perverse incentives. Henry George proposed such a program over 100 years ago. Put simply - since the value of land is created by society, society should be paid for the use of that land. All other taxes should be eliminated.
No kidding... Just articles on taxes from the Times, never on the real problem - spending.
This will never happen because increasing the income tax is what the plutocrats want specifically to prevent others from becoming as powerful as they are.
I’m not so sure. They could just say it’s a tax, and not a taking. Congress has authority to tax, so problem solved. Chief Justice Roberts to write the opinion. I wish I could say this couldn’t happen, but the Supreme Court would not protect us.
To me, it is immoral to tax a person’s income. We need our income. But I see no problem taxing wealth because the person has the money to pay for food, medicines etc.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.