In the 1950s the USA's top tax rate was over 90%...just to put things in perspective. As much as people complain about taxes, by historical standards, they're damn low. At least marginal income tax.
Of course the pie can grow for everyone. Problem is, the pie may grow rapidly for one demographic and hardly at all for another. We don't have just one economy. We don't all suffer equally when the shit hits the fan. Nor does the rising tide lift all boats. Incomes for normal people in America haven't changed in 30 years relative to inflation. Incomes at the top echelons have exploded in the same time-frame.
Think about something like the GM bailout. The stocks our government bought have been at a loss. But the rich will eventually pay for it. This will allow lower and middle class people to keep working. When you step back and look, it's a great example of an indirect transfer of wealth. And probably about the most benign type you can have. Rather than paying people welfare to sit at home, you are paying people to do something productive. If the rich have the money, then it's money well spent in my opinion.
Quote:Tenderman Wrote:
But when it comes to economics, the left has at root incredibly flawed and incredibly destructive ideas. The main rotten notion the left has is what I would call the "Zero-Sum Static Pizza Pie Concept." Namely, that the economy is one static pie that doesn't grow, and that rich people take bigger slices than less rich people. The left would have the government get out the knife, and re-slice the pie according to their idea of "fairness."
Of course the pie can grow for everyone. Problem is, the pie may grow rapidly for one demographic and hardly at all for another. We don't have just one economy. We don't all suffer equally when the shit hits the fan. Nor does the rising tide lift all boats. Incomes for normal people in America haven't changed in 30 years relative to inflation. Incomes at the top echelons have exploded in the same time-frame.
Think about something like the GM bailout. The stocks our government bought have been at a loss. But the rich will eventually pay for it. This will allow lower and middle class people to keep working. When you step back and look, it's a great example of an indirect transfer of wealth. And probably about the most benign type you can have. Rather than paying people welfare to sit at home, you are paying people to do something productive. If the rich have the money, then it's money well spent in my opinion.