Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Sun Tzu
The federal reserve bank seems to be the biggest culprit of improper wealth distribution. Ron Paul appears to be the only one to stand up and put a stop to the ongoing BS. I dont think any one person is going to please everyone.
In a free market everyone has the opportunity to make whatever they are 100% intent to create. It boils down to what they are willing to sacrifice to achieve it.
|
Your "free market opportunity" is what remains when "Paulite" deregulation accelerates the current trend of rolling back the post 1932 financial markets and banking regulations and oversight put in place as a reaction to the pre-1932 lack of regulation and oversight.
Would you still fly on an airliner if the FAA oversight and regulation was "treated" to free market style deregulation? What would landing and takeoff and airline safety look like if commercial airlines and private pilots were left to "work out" these operational issues, amongst themselves? There were no airplanes when the US constitution was drafted, and IPO's and insider trading were non-issues. Should the FAA regulation be tranferred to the individual states?
What do you want to happen? Where have we been, where are we now? What has changed since the financial reforms of the 1930's? Do we keep FDIC bank deposit insurance, social security disability insurance and retirement benefits, unemployment insurance, SEC and banking regulations, oversight and enforcement, progressive income tax regs and collection, and the IRS, friendlier personal bankruptcy laws, or the harsher "reforms" of two years ago? Is the NLRB more supportive of workers rights with the current pro-employer board appointed by Bush?
How will changing any of the above, impact wealth inequity? If federal legislation was not responsible for the growth of strong unions and workers rights, and a social safety net that resulted in a dramatic rise in numbers of middle class households in the 1950 to 1970 period, what were the contributing factors?
Wealth distribution in 1929 was similar to the unequal way that it is skewed today. Wealth equality was improved during the mid 20th century period when top income tax bracket ranged from a high of 91 percent to a low of about 60 percent, and trended towards today's inequality as the top tax bracket was lowered.... It's a fact....should we ignore it if we are committed to lessening wealth inquity? <h3>As a country, what are we committed to, as far as the problem of wealth inequality?</h3>
The argument in this thread's OP cannot be answered with the simplistic "abolish the Fed" Paulite remedy.
There is already a thread for that and it offers no recognition of the trend toward wealth concentration that triggers, if we're lucky, a Hugo Chavez type blowback....if we're less fortunate, violent civil unrest will emerge.
As roachboy described, I'm attempting to describe present wealth inequality, and the trend.....the trend is headed in an unsustainable direction. Electing Ron Paul, since he offers only what Sun Tzu describes, is no solution.
Our great-grandfathers faced very similar challenges, as far as the state of wealth distribution, and the series of government reforms they supported, raised living standards and made the distribution of wealth more equitable and sustainable, and did not "beggar" the rich or remove their incentive to seek profits....
This thread is intended to disuss the idea that the majority of us can do better than if we vote for Ron Paul for president.
I don't accept that we deserve less, or can achieve less, than the Swedes have managed. Either the bulk of their population has a history of voting against the best interests of most voters...<h3>or, ours has:</h3>
<h3>This is a politics thread. Why can't we discuss important choices? Why is wealth distribution in the US, the most inequitable in any of the developed countries? </h3>
Hasn't wealth distribution become more unequal since Reagan tax cuts and income tax reform, and passage of
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taft-Hartley_Act in 1947 and repeal of the second
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glass-S...al_of_the_Acts of 1933, in 1999?
Why is wealth distribution in a long term trend towards even greater wealth inequality?
Why would a growing number, with the wealth inequality trend we have, and face in the future, embrace Ron Paul? Is there any example of a country achieving wealth distribution more similar to that in EU countries, than in the US, without steeply progressive income taxes and extensive government regulation and oversight?
<h3>....if the answer is no....and given the state of our wealth inequality, isn't supporting Ron Paul "reforms", no solution for stabalizing the finances of and the size of the US middle class?</h3>