Special offer

Will people please stop talking about wealth redistribution.

By
Real Estate Agent with Keller Williams Realty

The Reagan years between 1980 and 1988 to be sure had created over 19 million new (low paying)jobs, exploding technology, unprecedented prosperity and had rekindled national pride. It also led to firing of 10 million high paying manufacturing jobs as corporations received tax incentives to move their operations overseas.

In fact in the 1980's so many millionaires had been created that the term essentially had become meaningless. By 1988 it was estimated that there were over 100,000 decamillionaires.

But critics of the time saw another America were the 1980's were one last national fling with credit card economics one filled with beggars

It was also in the decade of the 1980's that the U.S. was transformed from the world's largest creditor nation to the world's largest debtor nation. Throughout the 1980's conservatives argued that this really didn't matter.

At the end of 1986 the U.S. had a national debt of $269 billion, at the end of 1987 it was $368 billion, but by 1992 it was $3.5 trillion. It was the greatest economic miscalculation in recorded world history.

It is not enough to describe the U.S. as the world's richest nation between 1945 and 1992. What is more important is the distribution of its wealth.

The U.S. by 1984 had the greatest gap between rich and poor of any industrialized nation in world history.

In 1953 there were 27,000 millionaires, in 1964 90,000 millionaires, in 1972 180,000, in 1980 574,000, and in 1988 1.3 million.

In 1981 there were perhaps 10 billionaires in the U.S., 26 in 1986, 49 in 1987 and 52 in 1988. No parallel upsurge of riches had ever been seen since the late 19th century of the Vanderbilts, Morgans and Rockefellers.

But the downside to all this concentration of wealth was that wages-the principal source of middle and lower class income had stagnated through 1986. The Reagan decade was a heyday for unearned income as rents, dividends, capital gains and interest gained relative to wages and salaries as a source of wealth and growing economic inequality.

The top 10% of U.S. households controlled over 68% of the wealth of the U.S. by 1988.

The average millionaires income might be soaring, but the average family's income was stagnating since the late 1970's in real dollars. In fact real income in 1987 finally recovered back to 1973 levels.

The income of White males fell through the 1980's especially in the manufacturing sector as corporations received tax breaks to move their operations overseas.

The GAO reported in 1988 that there had been a resurgence of sweatshops and other businesses that openly violated wage, child labor, safety and health laws in almost every sector of the U.S. due to business deregulation.

While wages fell the number of economically active population fell as well throughout the 1980's. By the summer of 1988 45.3% of the inhabitants of New York city were not part of the economically active due to poverty, lack of skills and education, drug abuse, apathy or other problems. The nation of average of economically inactive was 34.5%.

Women were also losers in the Reagan Revolution. Families weren't just shrinking they were breaking down. 53% of all Marriages ended in divorce in the 1980's a trend that continues in the 1990's.

Household headed by women, especially those with children ranked well down on the income scale.

One survey that found that for those working in the 1980's they were working harder than ever before in the 20th century. Americans leisure time declined 37% between 1973 and 1987--from 26.2 hours per week to 16.6 hours.

In addition a new sector of the labor force emerged for the first time in the 1980's, "the contingent work force". Airlines, supermarket chains, offices and almost all businesses began to hire temporary labor rather than full time workers. It was cheaper and also seriously undermined the power of organized labor.

For the first time since the depression a majority of Americans by 1989 could not afford to buy a home.

In each period of American history wealth was redistributed regionally and from one income to another.

It's time to reverse Reaganomics and let the middle class prosper.

Mike D
Henderson, NV

EXCELLENT POST, John!!!!

John McCain is just so painfully clueless.  Like tonight in the debate, he keeps saying to turn the economy around we need to have home values increase.  That's all well and good except for that pesky affordability gap problem!  I know that's what we in the Las Vegas area need....more $300,000 homes for people that bring in $45K a year.  

Not all Americans have the opportunity to cheat on their first wife with a major beer distributor heiress and make it stick!

But it's not just that McCain is clueless....but it is that Barack Obama actually gets it!  He understands that the true economic engine is the empowerment of the middle class.  The middle class are the ones that buy all the useless trinkets that make the world go round. 

Although.....only financial hacks like Warren Buffet back Obama's economic policy......what does he know anyway?!?!?

 

 

Oct 15, 2008 05:52 PM
Linda Mae Croom
Topock, AZ
(928) 768-3040

Carl,

 I don't know where you live but where I live in Arizona Most families live in trailers and single wide moble homes in a 200 square mile radius. Most are lucky to have 1 TV and a beat up jalopy. The kids wear what they can to school. And the combined income of the father and the mother is an average of $22,000 a year. There is a 10 year old down the road that comes over occasionally with two of his friends to watch a movie on my Flat Screen TV and they think they are in Heaven because they have never seen one before. (except in Wal-Mart)

There are 12 million children and 22 million adults in AMERICA who went to bed starving tonight.

Glad you are lucky enough to live in a place where the poor have all the luxuries you listed. Around here if someone had those things they would be looked at as extremely wealthy. 

Oct 15, 2008 06:25 PM
Mitchell J Hall
Manhattan, NY
Lic Associate RE Broker - Manhattan & Brooklyn

Forget law school or med school we all should send our kids to toilet school. Plumbers make more money. $250,000 year plumbers.

Oct 16, 2008 02:49 AM
John Guiney
Keller Williams Realty - Quincy, MA
e-PRO, CBR

Linda Mae - Did you ever notice how upset republicans get when someone points out to them that under Reagan wealth was redistributed from the middle classs to the wealthy? If someone talks about restoring the way it was before they call it socialism. Well I call what Reagan did facism.

Carl - I'm glad that all the poor folks in Des Plaines are so well off. I checked your recent area sold statistics and found that an average 3 bedroom home there sells for 282,000. No wonder they can afford all the amenities you mention. Imagine if they tried to live in say Manhattan or Boston or Las Vegas or any other large city. People on food stamps in this country live on $3.00/day. The Governor of Michigan has been trying to duplicate this for her family and finding it to be impossible, so maybe you should share the secret with her and the rest of us on how you folks are doing so well. Or is it that you are all living on borrowed money. You know, the kind of thing that has put us in this mess in the first place.

Mike - I agree Obama does get it and Warren Buffet might know a little bit more than the average Washington pol don't you think?

Mitchell - I guess I shouldn't have spent all that money going to business school and getting my degree! Joe the Plumber seems to be doing quite alright for himself. Maybe Carl can find him a nice spot in Des Plaines?

Oct 16, 2008 03:43 AM
Anonymous
Ed LeFevre (angry curious Sort)

Great topic and data supported points, John. But "they" refuse to "get" it. There is no way to even engage them in discussion.,...the brainwashing is so complete that they predictably react with "that's socialism", or, I know a poor family who have a wide screen TV, or, it's "my money", and
the government has no right to".... but I keep trying, keep informing myself. They've shut themselves off, gone into a closed loop comprised of the filtered Drudge Report and the Salem Communications 2000 religious/political talkradio stations, it's flagship website, townhall.com, Murdoch's Foxnews and the opinion pages of IBD and WSJ....because...they'll all tell you....the mainstream news media is "too liberal". I've posted the following here,                                         

10/16/2008 01:15 PM

...but it fits nicely with your topic, too, so.... written in response to Lane Bailey's

If Joe the Plumber had only said...

 

Why do you suppose, it is that democrats, the US State Dept., and in this article, the Irish people, are very concerned about inequitable wealth distribution, and how it affects a country, but you are not?

Shocking price of inequality not one we can afford to pay

Tuesday, October 7, 2008 Shocking price of inequality not one we can afford to pay

...it assessed the Human Poverty Index for 18 Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries - and Ireland ranked 17th. We were outstripped in the poverty league only by Italy, and fared worse than either the UK or the US. Unsurprisingly, Sweden emerged with the lowest poverty rating.

Last year also marked the publication of another report: Bank of Ireland Private Banking published its annual Wealth of the Nation report - and the picture painted was rather different. We were told that, in terms of net wealth per capita, Ireland was the world's second-richest country after Japan.

At first glance, it is difficult to square those contradictory and remarkably symmetrical figures - second in terms of wealth, and second in terms of poverty - unless one examines how that wealth is distributed. The internationally-accepted measurement of wealth equality/inequality is the Gini coefficient: a score of 0 indicates perfect equality, while a score of 100 indicates perfect inequality - ie, one person controls all income and assets. According to the most recent figures published by the UN, Ireland scores 34.3 - together with Greece and Indonesia, and just above Egypt.....

......Against this background, it is not surprising that 41 per cent of all respondents - and half of all higher income earners - professed themselves willing to pay higher taxes to fund improved public services, or that 80 per cent of all those surveyed are concerned about wealth inequality. They know - perhaps better than many in the political establishment - that inequality exacts a price. That price is paid not only by the individual languishing at the bottom of the inequality ladder - society pays a price in terms of alienation and, as taxpayers, we pay an inequality surcharge in terms of increased healthcare, education and social welfare costs...."

Lake Wallenpaupack, your late king Ronald came into office with a total national debt of just under $1 trillion, and when he ended his second four year term, the national debt was above $2-1/2 trillion....

Debt to the Penny (Daily History Search Application)

...His VP and successor, GHW Bush, left office with the national debt at $4.41 trillion. In Bush's final budget year, ended 9/30/93, the national debt increased by $399 billion. In the seventh budget year of the Clinton administration, ended 9/30/00, the annual national debt increase was just $18 billion. At the end of the year of the last Clinton budget, the national debt total was $5,807,463,412,200...

Historical Debt Outstanding

...two weeks ago, the national debt total, after seven GW Bush managed budget years, was

10,024,724,896,912 (that's $10.024 trillion....folks !)

....and there is this out today, contradicting McCain's claim that Obama's tax plan will negatively affect, "millions of small businesses":

The New York Times cites Small Business Administration data:

"...So will Americans who are in business for themselves have to pay more taxes if Mr. Obama is elected, as Mr. McCain asserted?

According to figures compiled by the Small Business Administration, there are fewer than six million small businesses that actually have payrolls. The rest are so-called nonemployer firms that report income from hobbies or freelance work done by their registered owners, earning as little as $1,000 a year.

Of these, according to a calculation by the independent, non-partisan Tax Policy Center, fewer than 700,000 taxpayers would have to pay higher taxes under Mr. Obama’s plan. But even some of these are not small-business owners in the traditional sense; they include lawyers, accountants and investors in real estate, all of them with incomes that put them in the top tax brackets.

So are there “millions more like Joe the Plumber,” as Mr. McCain contended? Probably not. Mr. Obama may well have been correct when he stated that “98 percent of small businesses make less than $250,000.”....

Why is it that republicans ceaselessly claim that democrats are the "tax and spenders", when it has been republican leadership, over the past 28 years, that has practiced "cut taxes but spend out of control"? Doesn't the contrast in the way the rate and amount of the  national debt rose, under Reagan and the Bushes, vs. the way the rate of debt growth under Clinton dropped, give you a reason to reexamine what you believe about who manages the federal budget more responsibly?

Why is it that republicans don't even see that the tax cuts they have enacted have aggravated the rate that the national debt has grown? Do they understand that the national debt grew $700 billion in the past year and will grow by more than another $1 trillion by 9/30/09?

Why are democrats criticized for talking about the wealth inequality, unique in the US compared to all other over developed countries (ODCs). What other means exist to less inequity of wealth distribution than tax policy? All other ODSs use tax policy to keep themselves out of the US's "Gini neighborhood":

Here is what the US State Dept. says about wealth inequity in Venzuela, a country which now has a LOWER Gini Coefficient than the US has-

The US State Dept. accepts that a high GINI number is a problem....here how it described the inequity in Venezuela in it's 2006 report:

Venezuela (01/06)

There is considerable income inequality. The Gini coefficient was 0.618 during 2003. According to private sources, the percentages of poor and extremely poor among Venezuelan population were 74.6% and 39.3%, respectively, in 2003. These high ratios are due primarily to lower real wages earned by employees, and high rates of un- and underemployment.

Venezuela (06/08)

"There is considerable income inequality. The Gini coefficient was 0.42 during 2007."

Countries with wealth inequity similar to the inequity in the US:

https://www.cia.gov/library/publicat...elds/2172.html
Burundi ........ 42.4 (1998)
Iran ........ 43 (1998)
Uganda ........ 43 (1999)
Nicaragua ...... 43.1 (2001)
Turkey ........ 43.6 (2003)
Nigeria ........ 43.7 (2003)
Kenya ......... 44.5 (1997)
Philippines .....44.5 (2003)
Cameroon ........44.6 (2001)
Uruguay ........ 44.6 (2000)
Cote d'Ivoire ...44.6 (2002)
United States ...45 (2004)

Jamaica ........ 45.5 (2004)
Rwanda ........ 46.8 (2000)
Malaysia ........46.1 (2002)
Mexico ........ 46.1 (2004)
China ........ 46.9 (2004)

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...093000495.html
Chinese Officials Vow to Spread Growth Benefits
Decision Reflects Awareness That Inequalities Could Become Politically Troublesome

By Edward Cody
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, September 30, 2005; 10:48 AM

....The Politburo's call for more determination to attack the problem
reflected growing awareness at senior levels of the party that widespread dissatisfaction over the glaring inequalities has become a potentially troublesome political issue....

Nepal .......... 47.2 (2004)
Mozambique ......47.3 (2002)
Madagascar ......47.5 (2001)
Venezuela .......49.1 (1998)
Argentina .......48.3 (June 2006)
Costa Rica.......49.8 (2003)
Sri Lanka .......50 (FY03/04)
Niger ...........50.5 (1995)
Papua New Guinea 50.9 (1996)
Thailand ........51.1 (2002)
Dominican Republic 51.6 (2004)
Peru ............52 (2003)
Zambia ........ 52.6 (1998)
Hong Kong........52.3 (2001)
El Salvador......52.4 (2002)
Honduras ........53.8 (2003)
Colombia ....... 53.8 (2005)
Chile .......... 54.9 (2003)
Panama ........ 56.1 (2003)
Brazil ......... 56.7 (2005)
Zimbabwe ........56.8 (2003)

What do you think was the catalyst that brought about the rise to power of Chavez in Venezuela and Castro in Cuba? Consider that the stance you take related to maintaing the way wealth is currently distributed in the US....just the way it is....is actually undermining the stabality of the economy and the political situation. Do you not understand and accept that politics is the process of wealth and power distribution...the dynamic between the "have less and have not" masses who have the sheer numbers of votes to bring about their political will, vs. the much smaller number of wealthy elite who compensate for their lack of numbers of votes via the political and propaganda power that their money buys. We know how effective they are at this, because, even though Disney owns ABC, Sumner Redstone's Viacom owns CBS, GE owns NBC, and Time-Warner owns CNN, they have manipilated you into an unassailable belief that the news media has a "liberal bias" ! THINK....people, I am begging you to,,,,

If there is no prosperous middle class in the US, who will be able to afford to buy a house or pay for Joe's plumbing services?

Oct 16, 2008 06:38 AM
#11
Mike D
Henderson, NV

Ed -

Sure...go ahead and make your point with facts and logic....silly liberal socialist!  What...is your middle name Hussein or something?!?!?  Maybe you can go take your facts and figures and show them to the terrorists that all liberal socialists pal around with!

What bleeding heart liberals don't understand is that Joe the Plumber has a FAR greater command of national economic issues than hacks like Warren Buffet.  

(great post, Ed!  Thanks!)

Oct 16, 2008 07:00 AM
Carl Ostenson
Ostenson Insurance Group - Des Plaines, IL

John and Linda. Actually the person I was refering to lives in rural Kentucky. Neither of the parents have jobs because of these wonderful social programs, they pay them enough that there is little incentive for them to get a job. (Although the wife was in a horrible car accident so she in unable to work)

Linda if your numbers are correct that means that 280 million people out of 300 million did not go to bed starving. That's 93% positive. And define starving for me. Are these people Ethiopia starving. I don't see Sally Struthers in the streets of Atlanta with little kids with emaciated bodies. I actually see alot of poor people that are obese. I fail to believe we have a starvation problem.

If you want to help starving people donate your time and money to private charities. I have in the past, it's wonderful cooking a meal for homeless people. I made jamblaya and corn bread the last time I volunteered at a shelter and they loved it. I bought the food, a bunch of us cooked it. No wasted money. They got fed. It was beautiful.

 Don't have the government steal from working people and waste the money and tell me that's the answer.

Oct 16, 2008 07:17 AM
Lane Bailey
Century 21 Results Realty - Suwanee, GA
Realtor & Car Guy

So, basically the point is that taxes aren't to fund the government as much as to try to evenly distribute wealth? 

Oct 16, 2008 08:53 AM
Carl Ostenson
Ostenson Insurance Group - Des Plaines, IL

Well Lane, I would think that taxes do fund the government, and depending on the mindset of the people in charge of spending the money at that time, many policies do seek to redistribute wealth.

Income taxes were not even around until the early 1900s and they were meant to be only temporary. If our government would stick to what they are supposed to be doing (ie Provide a military, a court system, build roads, maintain national parks and only a few other things we wouldn't have many of these wasteful problems. ) Social programs really didn't come around until FDR. Before that people relied on each other, their church, and private charity.

I believe that the current system is all wrong. You work hard and have to send 30% of your money if not more to the various forms of government. Then politicans and lobbyists have to go to the government and try to get as much of that money back as possible. Government has the power to give the money out as they see fit. That leads to corruption. It just seems so simple to me.

To think that government has the answer to everything including knowledge on how to take more money from a certain set of people and give more money to another set, in the interest of being FAIR is just ridiculous to me.

We have had a WAR ON POVERTY for how long now? And half the above posts are about how bad it is for poor people. Well maybe get the government out of trying to fix it. They have had about 50 years and according to many of bloggers it worse that ever.

And still people think the answer is higher taxes, more money and more programs.

Oct 16, 2008 12:58 PM
Lane Bailey
Century 21 Results Realty - Suwanee, GA
Realtor & Car Guy

I think maybe what we should do is take ALL money from people that is above the average, and then give the excess to anyone below the average.  That would make the difference in distribution zero... right? 

Of course, then the people that are on the high end would stop working because they wouldn't get anything for their harder work... and the people at the bottom would stop working because they would get the same thing anyway. 

Everybody could be equally poor...

That sounds like a GREAT idea.

Oct 16, 2008 01:22 PM
Carl Ostenson
Ostenson Insurance Group - Des Plaines, IL

Right on Lane. You just summed up my favorite book Atlas Shrugged in two paragraphs.

Oct 16, 2008 02:07 PM
Linda Mae Croom
Topock, AZ
(928) 768-3040

Hungry Children In America Is Very Real

 Tonight as you sit there reading this there are 12 million hungry children in the U.S.A. Yes 12 million children who may not have had enough food and may go to bed hungry tonight. Over the last few months I and members of People Helping People here in North Carolina have started locating food and taking it to the local shelters. We visit grocery store dumpsters and take the food from the dumpsters. We sort and repackage the food and take it to local shelters and give it to them to feed hungry persons. The need is so great. Every night in the local shelters there are children who do not have milk. And no they won't have any milk in the morning. We have created a hub page called Milk For The Children. CLICK HERE to visit that Hub Page.

And you know some of the things I find out sadden me and make me very angry.

We are currently in the process of shooting a documentry called Hunger In America. We hope to use the film to bring attention to the issues of Hunger in America. We hope to have the film up on You Tube before Thanksgiving. An estimated 30 to 35 million Americans are  getting barely enough food and nutrition to substain life.

Oct 16, 2008 07:02 PM
Linda Mae Croom
Topock, AZ
(928) 768-3040

 Carl,

I find it strange that you are so oblivious to the plight of poor people. And there are millions in our country. Saying that there is only 10% going to bed hungry tonight seems to make you feel  better? ONE CHILD going to bed hungry tonight is ONE CHILD too many.

And people are not always poor  because they are lazy. Some are born in to it and do not learn how to find there way out of it. Some do not have the IQ that so many have been blessed with. Some are emotionally ill or many live in society mentally ill or diseased.

Welfare is not the joy ride you so superficially elude to. My neighbors up the road with the 10 year old boy? They barely survive and believe me they are not FAT. And many times the poor are obese because they live on a diet of beans potatoes bread cheese and many of the foods that are welfare giveaways that lead to their obesity. Not because they are dining on too many steaks, vegetables fruits desserts and soda pop.

As for helping feeding the poor? That has always been my ministry.  For decades of restaurant ownership in California My restaurant was closed to the public on all Holidays and open to everyone in need of a hot meal. Every Sunday was soup kitchen day and I am the founder of Operation Holiday that over the years has fed thousands of hungry people by private donations. In the many many years that I was making over $250,000.00 a year I gave over $50,000.00 per year to feed the hungry and I am angered every time I read a comment on this site from a person who is irate that if Obama is elected he will raise taxes on people making over $250,000.00 by 3% Three Percent!!! That is $7,500.00.

How many Realtors do you know that are netting $250,000.00 after ALL Business write off's? it is VERY easy in this Business to have 40 to 50% in write-off's with Office costs, supplies, transportation, home office deductions and on and on the list goes. There are not too many left making over $400,000.00 gross in today's market.

And anyone in this Business making $250,000 free and clear after Realtor expenses should NOT be Bitching about giving $7,500.00 to help ANY HUMAN BEING at the bottom of the ladder.

I am one of those people who give change or what ever I can to people on the street. I am one of those that when asked why I do that because they are to lazy to get a job or will just buy beer I always reply Because God tells me to give what I have to those that are in need. I have obeyed God. End of story. Why that person is as they are or what they do with the money is what they will answer to God for. End of their story.

It is EXTREMELY SAD AND BREAKS THE HEART OF GOD TO HEAR YOU AND OTHERS SAY:

"Don't have the government steal from working people and waste the money and tell me that's the answer."

DO ANY OF YOU RIGHTEOUS CONSERVATIVE CHRISTIANS REALIZE THAT IF YOU WERE TAKING CARE OF ALL THE HUNGRY AND THE POOR AS YOU WERE INSTRUCTED IN THE BIBLE TO DO GOD WOULDN'T HAVE TO ELECT MEN YOU DON'T LIKE TO DO THE JOB FOR YOU?

Oct 16, 2008 07:50 PM
John Guiney
Keller Williams Realty - Quincy, MA
e-PRO, CBR

Lane - I think you just choose not to get it. What is happening here is a proposal from the Obama camp to restore the top income bracket back to 39% up from the current 36%. If you think that this is socialism, then you should be up in arms over income tax in general. If that's the case then who do you think should protect you and build your infrastructure and monitor your water and food and drugs to make sure your safe and well?

Carl - Do you seriously think that any nation could survive in these current times with no income tax. What you say about income taxes being temporary was true in 1900. The world has changed Carl and income taxes are as necessary as food and water today. An increase in top earners rate of 3% is not a lot to ask of us to restore this nation to it's previous glory. It's about all of us sacrificing for the greater good!

Linda - Bless you for your works and for the wisdom of your comment, ONE CHILD going to bed hungry tonight is ONE CHILD too many. As a huge fan of the late great Harry Chapin, I can tell you that he would be proud of you and so am I. If you are unfamiliar with Harry, He was a tremendous human being who sought to end world hunger and donated 50% of his considerable earnings to the cause.

Oct 17, 2008 01:19 AM
Mike D
Henderson, NV

Linda - Thank you for the comment you just made above.  I think the most frustrated I get toward the right side of the fence is when you just see the disgusting greed come out from some of the Conservative Christian group.  It is a true tragedy that the shameful few from the Conservative Christian movement seem to go out of their way to avoid everything that would actually be "Christ-like"

Thank you for your incredibly honorable service. 

Oct 17, 2008 03:00 AM
John Guiney
Keller Williams Realty - Quincy, MA
e-PRO, CBR

Mike - While I agree with you on the greed issue, unfortunately greed isn't restricted to just one group. It is most appalling however when it comes from those who call themselves Christians!

Oct 17, 2008 03:46 AM
Carl Ostenson
Ostenson Insurance Group - Des Plaines, IL

Good debate here.

It is EXTREMELY SAD AND BREAKS THE HEART OF GOD TO HEAR YOU AND OTHERS SAY:

"Don't have the government steal from working people and waste the money and tell me that's the answer."

DO ANY OF YOU RIGHTEOUS CONSERVATIVE CHRISTIANS REALIZE THAT IF YOU WERE TAKING CARE OF ALL THE HUNGRY AND THE POOR AS YOU WERE INSTRUCTED IN THE BIBLE TO DO GOD WOULDN'T HAVE TO ELECT MEN YOU DON'T LIKE TO DO THE JOB FOR YOU?

So let me get this straight. I break the heart of God because I think that the government wastes alot of our tax money on bad programs, and I believe that private charities and churches do a better job of caring for poor people than the government does. Ok that's your opinion. I'll have a chat with God later and see what he thinks.

If redistributing wealth works so well why did the USSR fail and why do Socialist states like  Venuzuela and Cuba have more poor people than we do? You want poor. They are poor. They have government that runs everything, yet the majority of the people are poor.

And John, of course our current size of government cannot survive without taxes. That's the problem. I live in Cook county. We have the highest sales tax in the nation, yet our local government in always in the hole, and raises taxes even more. 1/3rd of our county budget is either wasted or stolen. We have more FBI investigations into corruption than any other county in the US. No matter how much they take in, they spend more than they have.  

IF SENDING MORE MONEY TO THE IRS, AND OTHER FORMS OF GOVERNMENT IS WHAT YOU TRULY BELIEVE WORKS SO WELL, THEN WHY DON'T YOU VOLUNTEER TO SEND THE IRS MORE MONEY. No one is stopping you.

And I'm not a religious right. I'm a Libertarian and supported Ron Paul.

Oct 17, 2008 06:04 AM
Lane Bailey
Century 21 Results Realty - Suwanee, GA
Realtor & Car Guy

I AM up in arms over income taxes in general.  I think that the Founding Father would be up in arms over income taxes in general, and the 66,000 pages of tax laws we have on the books now in particular. 

Income taxes are NOT an effective way to "level the playing field".  Obama trying to go after increases in income taxes in the current economic climate are just plain stupid.  He knows that he is playing to class warfare politics and not logic.  It would be one thing if we weren't facing down the possibility of a recession... but he also knows that his supports are only interested in the sound bites...

Oct 17, 2008 07:17 AM
Mick Michaud
Distinctly Texas Lifestyle Properties, LLC Office:682/498-3107 - Granbury, TX
Your Texas Lifestyle is Here!

Naw, the Founding Fathers wouldn't have revolted over something like income taxes.  They didn't let it get that far.  They revolted, in part, over a tax (stamp act or tea tax) that didn't amount to a hill of beans in financial terms.  It was the principle that they revolted over.

We are WAY overdue for a revolution of our tax system and redistribution of wealth.  There, I said it. REDISTRIBUTION OF WEALTH. 

I don't object to the distribution of wealth, it goes into the hands of those who are industrious enough to be rewarded for what they do. 

Make no mistake that a stand against any tax plan that takes from those who earn is not an endorsement of the corporate greed and monopolistic tactics that exist in this country. 

 

We either live the the Constitution, or we amend it.  But don't twist it and change its definitions which are the very basis on which this country was built and then say our laws are Constitutional.  These plans coming from a socialist agenda are very (original) un-Constitutional.

Mike Michaud

Oct 17, 2008 07:57 AM
Lane Bailey
Century 21 Results Realty - Suwanee, GA
Realtor & Car Guy

What is funny is that if the government seized every bit of wealth in the country one day, and then parcelled it out evenly to everyone, in about 5 years the vast majority of those that had been poor would be poor again, and those that were rich would be rich again.  There are some exceptions, but not enough to be statistically significant. 

Look at the results of lottery winners.  Too many of them win huge and then a few years later are declaring bankruptcy.  Same goes for rockstars and actors.  As soon as the gravy train stops tossing down the cash, many of the de-rail on their own. 

I think I'm going to run a blog experiment to see what I see...

Oct 17, 2008 11:51 AM