Should US wealth be redistributed?

[VJW]

Re: Should US wealth be redistributed?

complete waste of time.

You sure are.

Have no argument to make with the United States Congress, eh ?

#

[jmjj215]

Re: Should US wealth be redistributed?

I think Optsol was trying to get you to show a correlation between the middle/lower class income dropping and the wealthy class' income increasing. That study doesn't show correlation.

[VJW]

Re: Should US wealth be redistributed?

Jesse,

Of course it does. That was THE conclusion of the study, that changes in federal taxes (personal, corporate, and excise) CAUSED the massive shift in after-tax income levels.

Now, there were additional factors that made it even worse, like the Federal Minimum Wage not keeping up with inflation, and state and local governments raising regressive taxes to compensate for the elimination of federal revenues to those governments. However, the massive shift in taxes in itself displays the magnitude of the shift in income inequities.

#

[jmjj215]

Re: Should US wealth be redistributed?

pretax incomes stagnated or fell for most segments of the population between 1980 and 1990, while the wealthiest one percent enjoyed HUGE increases in income.

Here we're talking about pre-tax income falling for 99% of Americans.

For the Middle-income and Lower-income families, in the first three-fifths percentile of the income scale, after-tax incomes DECLINED between 1980 and 1990. The after-tax incomes of the families in the fourth twenty percent of the income scale grew by only one percent over the same time period. However, the after-tax income of the wealthiest one percent of the population rocketed by a STAGGERING 136 PERCENT.

And there we're talking about how after-tax income fell for the poorest 3/5ths, barely grew for the 4th/5th, and then we only talk about the 1% wealthiest, ignoring the other 19% richest, whose after-tax income "rocketed".

To say pre-tax income fell, and then to say that after-tax income also fell for the same group doesn't seem to show that tax revenue was the main correlation at all.

[VJW]

Re: Should US wealth be redistributed?

Here we're talking about pre-tax income falling for 99% of Americans.

Well, stagnated or fell.

And there we're talking about how after-tax income fell for the poorest 3/5ths, barely grew for the 4th/5th, and then we only talk about the 1% wealthiest, ignoring the other 19% richest, whose after-tax income "rocketed".

Actually, they broke it down to the ‘Low 20%’, the ‘2nd 20%’, the ‘Mid 20%’, the ‘4th 20%’, the ‘Next 10%’, and the ‘Top 1%’. So, there is no “ignoring the other 19% richest”.

To say pre-tax income fell, and then to say that after-tax income also fell for the same group doesn't seem to show that tax revenue was the main correlation at all.

But it’s different by orders of magnitude. For example, the Treasury collected an additional $5 billion from the ‘2nd 20%’ of families, an additional $5.8 billion from the ‘Mid 20%’ of families, an additional $2.4 billion from the ‘4th 20%’ of families, and an additional $1.6 billion from the ‘Next 10%’ of families, but collected $83.7 billion LESS from the ‘Top 1%’ of families.

The effective tax rate on the wealthiest one percent dropped by 12.3 percent, which produced an average tax reduction of 30 percent from what they would have previously paid, hence the 136 percent spike in after-tax income.

The top one percent paid FAR less taxes and saw their incomes gain spectacularly, while almost everybody else paid more taxes and saw their incomes decline.

#

[jmjj215]

Re: Should US wealth be redistributed?

Okay - that's what I was looking fo then - actual treasury collections. Kind of looks like Robin Hood in reverse. Congress being the man in tights.

[VJW]

Re: Should US wealth be redistributed?

Well, but Congress was (foolishly) merely implementing the Reagan agenda.

It’s too bad the report is not available online, as it has some really illustrative charts that support the study quite nicely. I just happen to still have a hardcopy sitting on my bookshelf.

I wish I had unfettered access to the current 'GREEN BOOK' data.

#

[jmjj215]

Re: Should US wealth be redistributed?

VJW, how do you remedy a situation where the wealthy remain wealthy or get even wealthier because they're wealthy in the first place? I read an article just last week that mentioned that the poor have a higher standard of living as far as the 'niceties' of life go. The gap is obviously getting larger, but in absolute terms, how are the poor doing? I know you cite the wage declining, etc. but what I read said they have more than they ever have before.

[cercis]

Re: Should US wealth be redistributed?

Jesse, they have more because: 1) it is more acceptable to be in debt now and credit is amazingly easy to get and 2) goods are so much cheaper now. Used to be, a color tv was a week's pay or more, now, you can get a decent color tv (used) for $50 or less, you can get a new one for less than $100.

DH and I get credit offers all the time. We were offered a $100k limit credit card. Who needs that high of a limit? Together, we might, in a good year, gross half that amount.

[jmjj215]

Re: Should US wealth be redistributed?

The offered it, but were you already approved? If so, that is crazy. I guess the question isn't do they have more, but what do they have more of? Electronics' prices certainly have gone down, but last time I checked, milk hadn't...

[cercis]

Re: Should US wealth be redistributed?

Jesse, I didn't try for it, but it said "pre approved". I figured "pre-approved" meant we would get it (it said specifically pre-approved for $100k credit limit).

And you're right, many poor people have electronics but are chronically hungry. Part of that is that electronics are a one time purchase and relatively inexpensive, food is an ongoing purchase and getting higher all the time.

[VJW]

Re: Should US wealth be redistributed?

VJW, how do you remedy a situation where the wealthy remain wealthy or get even wealthier because they're wealthy in the first place?

But that’s not why it happened. As the study quite plainly indicates, it was intentional changes in public policy that created the massive shift in income.

I read an article just last week that mentioned that the poor have a higher standard of living as far as the 'niceties' of life go. The gap is obviously getting larger, but in absolute terms, how are the poor doing?

Well, Poverty has risen each and every year of the past five years. What does that tell you ?

I know you cite the wage declining, etc. but what I read said they have more than they ever have before.

But they’re falling behind faster now than ever before. You have to ask yourself, relative to what ? If your income rises by 2.5% but the inflation in the underlying economy is 5%, you are going backwards. This phenomenon is difficult for some to feel, as it’s not as obvious as a pay cut or runaway inflation, as a decline in Standard of Living is stealthy.

Not to mention that a lot what you are reading is based upon older data. Remember, from 1993 through 2000, Poverty declined each and every year, and by record historic rates, and real wages were rising as the national labor force swelled.

cercis also makes a good point. A lot of what has been mentioned are so-called “one time” purchases. People could have bought a computer, or a color TV, or an up-scale refrigerator, or an air conditioner in the 90s when they were doing better, and still have those items because their life span is 10, 15, or twenty years, but they are now in Poverty.

Poverty is relative to income, whereas wealth is relative to assets.

#

[shelbylovesmelby]

Re: Should US wealth be redistributed?

(sorry I didn't read all the posts)

The offered it, but were you already approved? If so, that is crazy. I guess the question isn't do they have more, but what do they have more of? Electronics' prices certainly have gone down, but last time I checked, milk hadn't...

I agree the prices of food han't gone down, but rather up. Milk in 2004 was outragious here... it was almost $4.50/gal! Now it's keeping paces with the cost of gas per gal.

Electronics prices are going down because of how rapidly new gadgets come on the market & others obsolete.

What would make the working poor to middle class have a lil bit more $ in their wallets is to bring back the high paying jobs we sent to Mexico (til they formed unions) & then they shipped them off to China. If the workers in China could form Unions there & demand higher wages maybe just maybe some of the big companies would bring their mfg back to the USA.

just my .02

[cercis]

Re: Should US wealth be redistributed?

Shelby, I have my own ideas about those manufacturing jobs. My thought is that currently we give corporations a nice little tax benefit (they are taxed less than individuals). Let's tax them more BUT then give them tax credits for number of jobs they create in the US. It might not make them bring jobs back to the US, but at least the government would get more tax revenue and could afford to fund things like universal healthcare (which has been listed as the #1 reason people don't start their own businesses).

[jmjj215]

Re: Should US wealth be redistributed?

But that’s not why it happened.

But don't you think the wealthy 'influence' this policy much more than the middle/poor class (through campaign contributions and/or their network)?