Most of this stuff we've discussed already, but it's all in one convenient place. I'd like for any conservative out there to give me a reason why it's in a society's best interests for an individual to be able to amass tens of billions of dollars of personal fortune, when the median income is 0.0004% of that? And median US household net worth is even smaller than income, due to debt. Is that billionaire even creating jobs with the money? Not really, apart from landscapers and nannies. And they're not investing in new ventures and companies either, since that's too risky with too much SEC red tape. They're just trading in currency and commodity markets, which make them an easy buck but don't really contribute to long-term economic growth.
I thought the attached image was funny. I know that a president doesn't control the economy, world events are constantly in flux, and sometimes their policies don't really kick in until they are out of office, but still. For the bottom 80% of US incomes since 1948, their income growth rates were over 50% smaller when a GOP was president vs. a Dem. For the top 20%, it's about the same for both parties, as one would expect. So much for liberals' taxation and regulation killing the economy. Those forces can be harmful, but apparently a GOP president correlates with a much worse outcome.
No comments:
Post a Comment