By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
badgenome said:
binary solo said:

I favour a (downwards) redistributive taxation and welfare system because, like cream, money always floats to the top in our economic system. So trickle down can't ever work with the current economic paradigm where wealth accumulation is a virtue, THE virtue.

I think that's a wrong way of looking at it. Income inequality offends some people's sense of fairness but is basically irrelevant as no one is doing worse because someone else did better. Economic growth is far more important. The standard of living for poor people is unbelievably high compared to what it was 50 years ago, because a rising (economic and technological) tide did indeed lift all boats.

Yes they are doing worse relatively speaking if the economic growth is inequitably distributed. If overall economic growth in the last 50 years was 200% then an equitable distribtion of that economic growth would be every economic stratum of society would have seen a 200% increase. But does that reflect reality? A widening income disparity is bad regardless of Economic growth if most of the increase in wealth from economic growth is going to the already wealthy then that's bad. Over the long term income disparity has increased considerably. This suggest the distribution of economic growth has been inequitable. In addition, having a robust welfare and public health system and a reasonable redistributive tax system is not incompatible with good economic growth. Economic growth, in under a reasonable redistributive tax system stimulates economic activity among the masses. And it's from the masses that the few get wealthy.



“The fundamental cause of the trouble is that in the modern world the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt.” - Bertrand Russell

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, the world will know peace."

Jimi Hendrix