Is income inequality 'morally wrong'?

nice rationalizations (and just one reason among many why I cannot stand this bbs)

you are still wrong

why not just admit it?

the playing field is objectively not level

you sort of admit this and then try to talk around it

might sell on this board

it does not in the real world because it is just flat out not true
 
Speaking of income inequality, I'm somewhat surprised to see this tax proposal come out of Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah), the Tea Party-backed conservative who unseated Robert Bennett in the GOP primary a few years ago.

It does the following:

1. Creates a two-bracketed tax code (15 percent for all income below $87,850.00 and 35 percent on all income above that).

2. Creates a $2,500.00 per child dollar for dollar credit (not a deduction) that is refundable up to the amount of your portion of payroll taxes.

3. Eliminates the marriage penalty by doubling the bracket sizes for married couples.

4. Eliminates many deductions. However, it expands the charitable deduction by not requiring families to itemize to use it. It keeps the home mortgage deduction but caps it at a $300,000 principle.

Sounds like a colossal tax cut for lower, middle, and middle to slightly upper income families. Frankly, that's refreshing step in the right direction and good politics for the GOP, if they'll adopt it.
 
personal attacks, how endearing

our system does not allow unrestricted economic mobility

this is just flat out false

you have been provided facts, but choose to ignore them

what is the reason for the differences in the 20% brackets in the respective societies?

is this too tough a question?
 
The studies (plural as there are five of them) absolutely support the simple fact that financial upward mobility faces significant obstacles in the US (ie the playing field is unlevel for some reason). This is not even debatable. The fact that you are debating it by chasing your tail in circles notwithstanding.

It is 50% worse in the US than Britain and 75% worse in the US than Denmark. The system is rigged for some reason or reasons.

Do we need to get into the lack of financial mobility of African- Americans?

I know what? Time for another personal attack.
 
Deez is correct that part of the problem is our tax system. The rise in income inequality mirrors the Reagan tax cuts.
 
This is such a waste of my time.

Your silly claims over the wage differences between countries assume that wage growth is similar in all three countries. This is wrong. How do I know it is wrong? I know it is wrong because there was more than one study. The Canadian study found the same thing.

This is like a dog chasing its tail. I quit. You can continue to believe your ********. You asked for objective evidence that there were obstacles to upward financial mobility in the US (actually I think you asked for objective evidence that the rich stay rich - it is all sort of connected). I gave it to you (both).

We can address these structural impediments (such as some tax code improvements and AFDC) or we can continue listening to the Faux News echo chamber and blaming the poor.
 
Its true and is true in every country.

FWIW, I agree with the economic/tax angles, but it goes much deeper than that. You can make whatever tax policy you want and people with no skills will make little money. You have to look at why people from these low SES backgrounds continue in the cycle of generational poverty. The simple answer is because they dont develop skills that allow them to prosper economically. The "why" is what I posted above.
 
Paso- Engaging with you is so tedious because you are being intentionally intellectually dishonest. I am responding to posts and information on this thread. I am adding context where I think it should be added. I have responded specifically to questions you asked. I have, in turn, asked you questions and you simply ignore them. And you continually misrepresent my positions.

In reply to:
Click to expand...
 
^^^^

No, you are fine. You just like pounding your fist sometimes. Why do Asian americans have upward mobility, despite their disadvantages?
 
Why don't African-Americans? I thought the playing field was level, no? That sure seems to be the ever-shifting target. That one particular group might break the curve or mold sure seems to prove my point.
 
.The welfare state has created a permanent class that is comfortable not working. The more kids you have the more benefits you amass. Our current president has added fuel to the fire by offering even more and more handouts. You are not living in poverty if you have housing cable cell phones and air conditioning. Plus food stamps and healthcare. I worked my way through college and now have a reasonably comfotable living. You have to want to succeed unfortunately the easy path is often taken. Any benefit gained should have some type work requirement unless you are really disabled.
 
I think we are talking about two different things. The welfare state certainly contributes to people choosing to live off the government. Upward mobility from the bottom 20% to the top 20% is a different story. If all the people on welfare chose to start working, it would be a good thing. But, they wouldnt have the skills to move from the bottom 20% to the top 20% in the vast majority of cases.
 
You listed a lot of stuff that the government provides for people without skills or work ethic. Has it done much to provide upward mobility to those in the bottom 20%? Not much in my opinion. It keeps us from having massive slums like in 3rd world countries, but thats about it.

It provides opportunities to children that are ill-equipped to turn those opportunities into success based on the info in my above post. There is no government program that can fix bad parenting or undo the damage that it does to children.

If I were king, I would front load the system with early childhood programs that have been proven to work. Things such a pre-k have a mountain of evidence that supports that money being spent as it increases graduation rates, increases the number of low income kids that go to college, decreases the amount that go to jail, decreases the amount labeled special ed, etc. Most head start programs are a disaster that do not generate the same results. I have seen some research that show no positive benefits at all because these centers are just an extension of a crappy home life. Expand the ones that work and cut the ones that dont. I would start low income kids in schools even earlier because most are getting nothing out of their home life.

The flip side is that the funding would come from cuts to programs that are not working as well as welfare type support for adults. I know that with our current group of political whores, that is a dangerous proposition because we will get the programs but no cuts elsewhere. But, I think we would see much better results as far as upward mobility and a better education product by front loading the system. I read a study done a few years back that said you would need to spend $7 on drop out recovery programs to acheive the same results as $1 spent on pre-k.

Edit to add that when I say head start, I am refering to the federal head start program, not early childhood programs in general.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Weekly Prediction Contest

* Predict HORNS-AGGIES *
Sat, Nov 30 • 6:30 PM on ABC

Recent Threads

Prediction Results Threads

2024 Schedules

Back
Top