Comments on: Why Income Distribution Doesn’t Matter in This Country http://www.coyoteblog.com/coyote_blog/2005/06/why_income_dist.html Dispatches from a Small Business Fri, 19 Mar 2010 01:53:08 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Megabyte http://www.coyoteblog.com/coyote_blog/2005/06/why_income_dist.html/comment-page-1#comment-1324 Megabyte Wed, 01 Mar 2006 09:24:08 +0000 http://coyote-blog.com/wordpress/2005/06/why_income_dist.html #comment-1324 <p>There are jokes saying that most Americans have no idea about "what the rest of the world is" and "why people hate you so much". These jokes are unfair. Many Americans (particularly Marines, paramilitary groups and CIA-trained terrorists, economic-hit-men) know what they did in Vietnam, Guatemala, Nicaragua, El Salvador, Cile, Panama, Cuba, Indonesia, Palestine, Iraq, Afghanistan and many other countries...they also know why people hate them so much, and they know it is not about a supposedly superior quality of life. In fact, if you look at the social indicators (e.g. crime, depression, anxiety, control over life, children's problems, poverty, access to healthcare, discrimination) the US is a social disaster. If Americans also have no idea about "how inequality disintegrates society" is just another little addition to the overall picture of ignorance. There is nothing to be worried about it.</p> There are jokes saying that most Americans have no idea about “what the rest of the world is” and “why people hate you so much”. These jokes are unfair. Many Americans (particularly Marines, paramilitary groups and CIA-trained terrorists, economic-hit-men) know what they did in Vietnam, Guatemala, Nicaragua, El Salvador, Cile, Panama, Cuba, Indonesia, Palestine, Iraq, Afghanistan and many other countries…they also know why people hate them so much, and they know it is not about a supposedly superior quality of life. In fact, if you look at the social indicators (e.g. crime, depression, anxiety, control over life, children’s problems, poverty, access to healthcare, discrimination) the US is a social disaster. If Americans also have no idea about “how inequality disintegrates society” is just another little addition to the overall picture of ignorance. There is nothing to be worried about it.

]]> By: Notta Libb http://www.coyoteblog.com/coyote_blog/2005/06/why_income_dist.html/comment-page-1#comment-1323 Notta Libb Thu, 15 Dec 2005 12:25:53 +0000 http://coyote-blog.com/wordpress/2005/06/why_income_dist.html #comment-1323 <p>Check out a site dedicated to the absurdity and satire nature of saying "It's All George Bush's Fault!"</p> <p>http://www.itsallgeorgebushsfault.com</p> <p>Regards,<br /> Notta Libb<br /> </p> Check out a site dedicated to the absurdity and satire nature of saying “It’s All George Bush’s Fault!”

http://www.itsallgeorgebushsfault.com

Regards,
Notta Libb

]]> By: gdonovan http://www.coyoteblog.com/coyote_blog/2005/06/why_income_dist.html/comment-page-1#comment-1322 gdonovan Thu, 23 Jun 2005 13:40:19 +0000 http://coyote-blog.com/wordpress/2005/06/why_income_dist.html #comment-1322 <p>>their continued wealth means we haven't >redistributed any wealth to the poor</p> <p>I'm sorry but this line of thought frightens me-</p> <p>Why should "we" take money from the rich and give it to "the poor"?</p> <p>As someone who works hard for what little I have, the thought of someone "taking" the fruits of someone else's work and redistributing it is abhorrent.</p> >their continued wealth means we haven’t >redistributed any wealth to the poor

I’m sorry but this line of thought frightens me-

Why should “we” take money from the rich and give it to “the poor”?

As someone who works hard for what little I have, the thought of someone “taking” the fruits of someone else’s work and redistributing it is abhorrent.

]]> By: Paul Gowder http://www.coyoteblog.com/coyote_blog/2005/06/why_income_dist.html/comment-page-1#comment-1321 Paul Gowder Tue, 21 Jun 2005 14:10:35 +0000 http://coyote-blog.com/wordpress/2005/06/why_income_dist.html #comment-1321 <p>In one very real sense, the richness of the rich does cause the poor to be poor: not because their getting rich removed opportunities for the poor, but because their continued wealth means we haven't redistributed any wealth to the poor. If we believe that lifting all boats (as it were) is good, then redistribution is an affirmative good. In this case, wealth concentrations aren't bad in-themselves, but are bad because they're evidence that the poor are getting screwed in a relative sense by absence of redistribution.<br /> </p> In one very real sense, the richness of the rich does cause the poor to be poor: not because their getting rich removed opportunities for the poor, but because their continued wealth means we haven’t redistributed any wealth to the poor. If we believe that lifting all boats (as it were) is good, then redistribution is an affirmative good. In this case, wealth concentrations aren’t bad in-themselves, but are bad because they’re evidence that the poor are getting screwed in a relative sense by absence of redistribution.

]]> By: Paul Gowder http://www.coyoteblog.com/coyote_blog/2005/06/why_income_dist.html/comment-page-1#comment-1320 Paul Gowder Tue, 21 Jun 2005 14:09:44 +0000 http://coyote-blog.com/wordpress/2005/06/why_income_dist.html #comment-1320 <p>In one very real sense, the richness of the rich does cause the poor to be poor: not because their getting rich removed opportunities for the poor, but because their continued wealth means we haven't redistributed any wealth to the poor. If we believe that lifting all boats (as it were) is good, then redistribution is an affirmative good. In this case, wealth concentrations aren't bad in-themselves, but are bad because they're evidence that the poor are getting screwed in a relative sense by absence of redistribution.<br /> </p> In one very real sense, the richness of the rich does cause the poor to be poor: not because their getting rich removed opportunities for the poor, but because their continued wealth means we haven’t redistributed any wealth to the poor. If we believe that lifting all boats (as it were) is good, then redistribution is an affirmative good. In this case, wealth concentrations aren’t bad in-themselves, but are bad because they’re evidence that the poor are getting screwed in a relative sense by absence of redistribution.

]]> By: Newmark's Door http://www.coyoteblog.com/coyote_blog/2005/06/why_income_dist.html/comment-page-1#comment-1328 Newmark's Door Tue, 21 Jun 2005 10:01:17 +0000 http://coyote-blog.com/wordpress/2005/06/why_income_dist.html #comment-1328 <strong>http://newmarksdoor.typepad.com/mainblog/2005/06/three_fabulous_.html</strong> Three fabulous posts on the Coyote Blog: 1. http://newmarksdoor.typepad.com/mainblog/2005/06/three_fabulous_.html

Three fabulous posts on the Coyote Blog: 1.

]]> By: Newmark's Door http://www.coyoteblog.com/coyote_blog/2005/06/why_income_dist.html/comment-page-1#comment-1779 Newmark's Door Tue, 21 Jun 2005 10:01:17 +0000 http://coyote-blog.com/wordpress/2005/06/why_income_dist.html #comment-1779 <strong>http://newmarksdoor.typepad.com/mainblog/2005/06/three_fabulous_.html</strong> Three fabulous posts on the Coyote Blog: 1. http://newmarksdoor.typepad.com/mainblog/2005/06/three_fabulous_.html

Three fabulous posts on the Coyote Blog: 1.

]]> By: Newmark's Door http://www.coyoteblog.com/coyote_blog/2005/06/why_income_dist.html/comment-page-1#comment-2888 Newmark's Door Tue, 21 Jun 2005 10:01:17 +0000 http://coyote-blog.com/wordpress/2005/06/why_income_dist.html #comment-2888 <strong>http://newmarksdoor.typepad.com/mainblog/2005/06/three_fabulous_.html</strong> Three fabulous posts on the Coyote Blog: 1. http://newmarksdoor.typepad.com/mainblog/2005/06/three_fabulous_.html

Three fabulous posts on the Coyote Blog: 1.

]]> By: simon http://www.coyoteblog.com/coyote_blog/2005/06/why_income_dist.html/comment-page-1#comment-1319 simon Wed, 15 Jun 2005 02:45:37 +0000 http://coyote-blog.com/wordpress/2005/06/why_income_dist.html #comment-1319 <p>Great post!!!</p> <p>The rich get that way by luck ... right ... and the poor get that way by poor luck?</p> <p>Rich get rich by rent seeking ... yes and your point is? </p> Great post!!!

The rich get that way by luck … right … and the poor get that way by poor luck?

Rich get rich by rent seeking … yes and your point is?

]]> By: Shannon Love http://www.coyoteblog.com/coyote_blog/2005/06/why_income_dist.html/comment-page-1#comment-1318 Shannon Love Tue, 14 Jun 2005 20:07:13 +0000 http://coyote-blog.com/wordpress/2005/06/why_income_dist.html #comment-1318 <p>The basic tax rate means nothing. It is the effective tax rate that is everything. During the 50-70s the tax rates on the wealthy supposedly rose but the huge number of loopholes meant that the very wealthy often paid a lower rate than the middle class. I believe that Malcom Forbes famously paid zero income tax for 3 years during the 70's. After Reagan's reforms, the rich paid a higher percentage of all taxes after the loopholes where closed and the rates were lowered. </p> <p>It was the envy driven rhetoric of "tax the rich" that allowed this state of affairs to come to pass. Leftist found it easy to get high rates voted in but found it difficult to prevent the gradual accretion of loopholes that only the wealthy could take advantage of. </p> The basic tax rate means nothing. It is the effective tax rate that is everything. During the 50-70s the tax rates on the wealthy supposedly rose but the huge number of loopholes meant that the very wealthy often paid a lower rate than the middle class. I believe that Malcom Forbes famously paid zero income tax for 3 years during the 70’s. After Reagan’s reforms, the rich paid a higher percentage of all taxes after the loopholes where closed and the rates were lowered.

It was the envy driven rhetoric of “tax the rich” that allowed this state of affairs to come to pass. Leftist found it easy to get high rates voted in but found it difficult to prevent the gradual accretion of loopholes that only the wealthy could take advantage of.

]]>