Posted by Sir Four at 4:51pm Jan 27 '11I should say, they denounce wealth redistribution by the government. The private market "spreads the wealth around" by employing workers and paying them to do something productive that generates value for those higher up the economic food chain. I presume that conservatives believe this is the method by which wealth should be properly distributed in a society.
Obama said something interesting in the SOTU. A factory that 50 years ago may have employed 1,000 workers may only need 100 workers today to get the job done. Some of that work was automated away. Some was outsourced to cheap labor countries. But regardless of how it happened, the factory's owners simply do not need to employ nearly as many (local) people as they used to.
This trend has wiped out millions of jobs--jobs that once supported working class families. It should come as no surprise that the gains made by eliminating these jobs have been captured by the wealthiest segment of society. The wealth disparity, and the high unemployment, I fear will only worsen if this trend continues on its course.
We've got a situation where a CEO can close a factory, relocate production to China, lay off 500 (local) workers, and give himself a $10 million bonus for being so awesome. Rinse and repeat across the economy, and the results are devastating.
So what do we do?
The one answer I'm coming up with right now is, make the tax code more progressive. Because trends in the free market are such that wealth is being distributed less broadly than in anyone's living memory, and is in fact concentrating ever more among a small, very rich segment of the population, I believe higher tax rates are in order at the high end. I think that revenue should be plowed back into education, small business tax breaks (or low interest loans, etc), research grants, and infrastructure. I think such public investments would give the average person more of a fighting chance in this increasingly competitive and ever-changing world economy.
But what do you think?
Obama said something interesting in the SOTU. A factory that 50 years ago may have employed 1,000 workers may only need 100 workers today to get the job done. Some of that work was automated away. Some was outsourced to cheap labor countries. But regardless of how it happened, the factory's owners simply do not need to employ nearly as many (local) people as they used to.
This trend has wiped out millions of jobs--jobs that once supported working class families. It should come as no surprise that the gains made by eliminating these jobs have been captured by the wealthiest segment of society. The wealth disparity, and the high unemployment, I fear will only worsen if this trend continues on its course.
We've got a situation where a CEO can close a factory, relocate production to China, lay off 500 (local) workers, and give himself a $10 million bonus for being so awesome. Rinse and repeat across the economy, and the results are devastating.
So what do we do?
The one answer I'm coming up with right now is, make the tax code more progressive. Because trends in the free market are such that wealth is being distributed less broadly than in anyone's living memory, and is in fact concentrating ever more among a small, very rich segment of the population, I believe higher tax rates are in order at the high end. I think that revenue should be plowed back into education, small business tax breaks (or low interest loans, etc), research grants, and infrastructure. I think such public investments would give the average person more of a fighting chance in this increasingly competitive and ever-changing world economy.
But what do you think?
Conservatives denounce 'wealth redistribution' - Sir Four