- The top one per cent of Americans own forty-two per cent of all wealth, while the richest twenty per cent hold eighty-seven per cent of the country’s wealth. Furthermore, the richest 11,000 American households have more income than the bottom 25 million households (over 75 million Americans.)
- According to Forbes magazine, during eight years of the Bush administration, the 400 richest Americans, who now own more than the bottom 150 million Americans, increased their net worth by $700 billion.
- In 1955, IRS records indicated that the 400 richest people in the country were each worth an average $12.6 million, adjusted for inflation. Today, the 400 richest increased their average wealth to $3.45 billion, an increase of 274 fold.
- In 1955, the richest tier paid an average 51.2 per cent of their income in taxes that included loopholes. Today the richest Americans pay less than 17.2 per cent of their income in taxes, almost the same rate as declared by billionaire-investor Warren Buffet.
- In 1955, the proportion of federal income from corporate taxes was 33 per cent. Today it decreased to about 7.4 per cent. In 2009, GE generated $10.3 billion in pre-tax income but ended up owing nothing to Uncle Sam. In fact, it recorded a tax benefit of $1.1 billion. Big Oil giant Exxon Mobil, reported in 2009 a record $45.2 billion profit, but paid none of it to the IRS.
- Meanwhile, fifty million Americans have no health insurance while 46.2 million (one in six, and twenty-two per cent of all American children) live in poverty, the most in fifty-two years.
- According to the latest labor statistics over 14 million Americans are jobless, while over 30 million are underemployed. Five million people have already given up looking for work after one year.
(From Counterpunch)
So here’s the question I have..
I am immensely sympathetic to these concerns, and I’ve seen way too many of them first-hand.
But what’s the solution? More regulation? Obviously *really* closing tax loopholes would help.. but ours is more of a spiritual problem. Greed is God, and the ‘haves’ have thoroughly convinced many of the ‘have nots’ that that’s okay. But demanding that the ‘haves’ simply give more seems much like demanding that the heroin addict stop shooting up.
Some pennies for one’s thoughts… The usual “YMMV” caveat, of course–but, IMHO, much worth pondering, nonetheless.
Should one disagree with any/part/all of these, or find anything(s) particularly objectionable, would one please explain/articulate/discuss why?
Thanks in advance.
http://cafehayek.com/2011/10/incomes-are-created-not-distributed.html
http://pajamasmedia.com/instapundit/129243/
http://captjustice.com/2011/10/07/the-world-owes-me-everything/
BW,
You’re right, in that this is a spiritual problem. Greed is a sin, indeed. But simply saying it’s a spiritual problem, without demanding some kind of economic justice and recompense to the poor, is really just a cop-out to do nothing.
It often takes a while for a person to have a change of heart. Repentance should actually be a life-long pursuit. And while we wait for Wall Street fat cats and ambitious politicians to have a spiritual awakening, there are many, many people suffering for their sins. Read the “We are the 99%” Tumblr to get an idea. Something must be done for families who are struggling to meet their basic living needs. If Gen-Yers, wearing costumes are needed for people to begin demanding economic reforms, then so be it.
Justice. To take from one person and give to another simply because the latter think it’s deserved isn’t justice. Justice is determined by an arbiter, whether that’s God or a judge or a jury or whoever. “You need to give us what you have” isn’t justice.
And I know this is going to be more controversial, but it needs to be said. There are desperately poor people in this country. Kids are going hungry. This is all true and horrifying. There are also many people in this country that are more poor than they should be because they make bad decisions with the little money they do have. When did cable television and a smartphone become a birthright? If we want to demand justice from the rich, we also need to demand justice from poorer people that buy Coach handbags instead of books for their kids. If the rich are delusional for thinking they deserve every dime they can grab, then the affluent poor are afflicted with a similar malady. Again, it’s a spiritual problem.
But, if we’re talking about concrete steps that can be taken, let’s close the tax loopholes so the rich are paying their fair share (where did Obama go on this one?) – then let’s demand accountability from people that are using entitlement programs. This way there’s more help for the people that *really* need it, or at least use it wisely.
Actually, taking ill gotten gain from one person and restoring it to those in need is indeed justice.
I’ll be sure to relay your message to “the affluent poor”. I’m surprised you didn’t dig out the old “welfare queen” shtick.
There is a spiritual problem here all right, but it’s not where you are looking.
Wow. I have a lot of respect for you and your blog. You’re right I have spiritual problems. I’ll readily admit that. I’m disappointed that you consider my comments to be on the ‘wrong side’ of the issue, thus indicative of such a ‘spiritual problem’.
Back on topic, I think it’s critical to examine every nook and cranny of this issue. “Rich bad, poor good” is not adequate examination. Much of what the rich have done to get that way isn’t ‘ill-gotten’. Some of what the poor have done to get that way isn’t someone else’s fault.
So again I’ll ask, what can be done in a governmental or regulatory sense to take ill-gotten gain from one person and restore it to those in need? Then a few follow-up questions. What makes a gain ‘ill-gotten’? Who gets to decide what is ill-gotten? We re-elected the losers that gave Halliburton and KBR billions in contracts. Is it our fault or theirs? What about tech companies like Google? Were the billions they made ill-gotten? No one’s forced to use gmail or their search page. Hotels and cable companies make billions from pay-per-view porn.. seems rather ‘ill-gotten’ to me, but you don’t see “Down with Hyatt!” or “Down with Comcast!” signs. In fact, it’s the opposite. Porn is becoming more and more socially acceptable.
Then how do we determine who is in need? Yes, there are obviously needy people. But what about poor people that gamble most of their money away, or spend it on frivolous things? If we’re going to give them money, should we not make them have as much of an ‘examination of conscience’ as we do the rich?
We just can’t make this issue simpler than it is in reality.
What I was reacting to was the suggestion that somehow the poor mishandling their resources is equivalent to the way the wealthy have plundered the country. And the stereotype of the “affluent poor” that you invoke. Do the poor often buy lottery tickets? Yes, of course; that is a wild hope for a desperate situation, and the Lottery Commissions know it, which is why their billboards are more common in poor neighborhoods.
All the data says that poor and working class and middle class people are seeing a steady erosion of resources, while the elite are getting richer and richer.
Occasionally politicians rail against the Earned Income Credit, claiming to be scandalized that unemployed Mary claims babysitting income from unemployed Betty, while Betty claims babysitting income from Mary, allowing both to earn the EIC from their mutually phantom incomes. A Scandal! on par with GE’s zero-tax-bill, no doubt.
To me it seems that playing the tax angles is an entry behavior to the middle-class which should be encouraged.
Everyone asks what can be done:
1. Change the tax structure for unearned income. Currently, long term capital gains and dividend income is taxed at 15% regardless of the amount. Move that closer to the nominal rate of each income level.
2. Close the ceiling for SS tax to be taken out of income over $106,000. Right now, you pay nothing into SS over $106,000.
3. We will have to do some kind of means testing for entitlements. If you have net worth/ income over a couple of million dollars, you don’t get as much SS and you are responsible for more of your medicare costs.
4. Do true single payer health care.
5. If corporations are domiciled in a country that allows them to pay no tax, then they pay the tax on those profits in this country.
That’s a start.
Another thing that could be done would be to make tariffs tax-neutral to the Federal government. So, an overseas manufactuer could import to the United States, but must pay the Social Security taxes they would have paid if their company was located here.
“But what’s the solution?”
Several changes would be immensely useful.
1. Money is not speech, however much the Supreme Court may insert this pernicious idea into the Constitution. Wealthy individuals have no superior right to influence the political system than poor individuals. In America, every citizen is equal.
2. Corporations are not people, however much the Supreme Court may insert this other pernicious idea into the Constitution. The owners of corporations already have rights … as citizens. They should not have special, double rights as business owners too.
3. Legislatively repeal First Interstate Bank of Denver, where corporate employees were allowed to begin shielding themselves from liability for aiding and abetting corporate law-breaking. Enron, Worldcom, syndication of junk mortgages as AAA debt, etc., etc., have followed this ill-conceived approach. (I know of tax accountants today writing memos to clients saying ‘this isn’t allowed by the tax code but go ahead anyway as you’re unlikely to be caught and if you are you can just pay a fine.’ That type of gross dereliction of professional responsibility once would have gotten such an attorney disbarred even if they went unprosecuted. Not today with it’s ‘grab the money while you can and everyone else be damned’ mentality. This attitude is anti-conservative and destructive of Christian beliefs in the duty of people to their fellow citizens, particularly future generations.)
4. Reform the U.S. Senate to be more democratic. It doesn’t have to be strict equalitarianism. But there’s something wrong when the Senators from the collective tiny populations of N. Dakota, Wyoming, Delaware, Alaska, and RhodeIisland (10 Senators), can make the difference between a majority vote of 50 and a filibuster proof vote of 60, that it takes to get anything done in our dysfunctional Senate. The origin of the Senate is not some grand genius of our Founding Fathers but a crude compromise that was necessary for the moment and not expected to last two centuries.
5. Require every citizen to vote. Just like jury duty. Just like paying taxes. You can spoil your ballot if you wish but you have to participate. How about a $2k refundable tax credit available for every citizen who can provide proof of voting in the last major election? Call it the Good Citizen Tax Credit.
I like all of these very good, sensible solutions! Very diverse, and from different angles, but really overall–fair. I am enjoying reading people putting forth positive solutions and not attacking each other. <3