I just don't know. I semi-get the entire transitional government roles and stuff, but at the same time, I really don't trust any of them. Generally speaking, I'm for bringing all of our government civilians home right now and see how this plays out. The problem is that we're too close to an election for anyone to actually take a hard look at this and actually do what needs to be done, whatever that is.
I'm not defending any of this in any way, but this is pretty much the case regardless of which party is in charge.
VD: By your very own logic, there is no livable tax rate that will satisfy you for those lower 50 % income earners. It is simple mathematics. By your chosen metric (% of total taxes paid) you could tax the lower half at rates like 75% and it would still appear a paltry sum in your percentages. I really don't think you are being reasonable or thinking through what you are saying. When the bottom 50% possesses less than 10 % of the wealth, they will never be able to pay a significant percentage of income taxes. If I'm wrong, identify the percentage of income tax that they should pay that would qualify, in your mind, as their fair share of total income tax percentage.
1) you are confusing wealth with income. It is not a wealth tax it is an income tax. 2) Don't ask 1 group to foot the bill for everyone. Increase 1 then increase all.
I'm not confusing wealth with income. Wealth is accumulated income. I am prepared to be corrected, but I suspect income and wealth have a pretty damn strong correlation.
So if they spent all of their money rather than saving it you would be cool with them since there would no longer be a wealth gap?
Wealth is essentially individual total assets - individual total liabilities. No doubt there is a correlation (I have no idea how strong nor am I going to pretend to), but you can have wealth and not have a high income and vice versa. The two secrets to having wealth are to have a decent income and live below your means.
Off the top of my head, I would venture to day that over-spending by the middle and lower class is one reason that the wealth gap is widening.
When they were spending less, all we heard about was how low consumer confidence and spending was killing the economy. what does it say about our economic system that the only way it can stand is if the lower and middle class "over-spend?" If people are buying less consumer goods and services, what will that do to the job market, the economy, etc?
wonder if gov't policies have anything to do with the capital being horded today? The idiotic message that trickle down doesn't happen is propaganda. Government policy, unfortunately, absolutely intervenes in the investment markets. Unfortunately, the implosion of the housing market has be followed on by policies or the threat of policies that scare the shiz out of the investing world. Unleashing private market capital is the key to creating jobs. Fomenting class warfare certainly isn't helping, though it's the linchpin of our current admin's economic policy.
Could it happen? I don't know, sure. Is it or did it? Nope. "Obama's fault" just isn't a detailed enough explanation for me to be convinced by, any more than "Bush's fault" was. In fact, the blaming of Obama foreign policy on the recent tragedy is strikingly similar to some of the unreasonable assignments of blame on Bush during his time.
The wealth that they are hoarding; where do you think it is at; perhaps financial institutions that loan money for people to buy cars, houses, loans for education, start a business? I doubt it is under their mattress or buried in their backyard.
Then why is the economy stalled? You can't have it both ways. They can't be doing all that AND there be policies allegedly keeping them from doing it.
