Re-Thinking Income Inequality 1



Re-Thinking Income Inequality

Income Inequality
Re-Thinking Income Inequality via Conservative Read

 

These are my comments on this article:

The Tax Code, excessive regulations, the national debt and the Federal Reserve are the major causes of the widening income inequality gap.

Solutions:

Abolish Tax Code and IRS

Enact Fair Tax (national sales tax)

Minimize regulations to only what is absolutely necessary.

Balance the budget.

Start decreasing the national debt.

Abolish the Federal Reserve as we know it. Replace with automated system as Milton Friedman suggested until better solution is discovered.

Allow gold and silver as legal tender.

The income inequality problem is counterintuitive. Big government equals more income inequality. Smaller government equals less income inequality.

The middle class is the byproduct of a free market economy; it is not manufactured by a politician’s tax gimmicks, minimum wage laws, or government redistribution of wealth.

There is no such thing as a living wage; there is only a wage that someone can afford to pay. You have to tailor your living around your wage, not have government tailor your wage around your living.

It is about supply and demand. If you have an easy time filling your employee needs, you offer lower wages, if you have a hard time filling your employee needs, you offer higher wages; because if you do not your competition will and you will be out of business.

It is not about what people deserve or what is fair or what is just; it is about what the market will bear. Blame the consumer for shopping for the lowest price and blame the voter for voting for government to fix their problems.

If government ignores the rich people, they will multiple and will have created jobs to support their income in the process.

Welfare needs to be local. Financial assistance has to be at the city level, funded by city coffers. If it is at any higher level it creates a mobility problem. People go where the jobs are, but many do not if they are paid to stay put.

If financial assistance was at the city level and funded by city coffers the resources for financial assistance would be distributed much more carefully. Because the funds would be limited by what the city could sustain, more people would choose to go where the jobs are and leave when economic times deemed necessary, if they had to, now that is not the case.

This is just another example why social programs funded at County, State or Federal Government levels can have an effect counter to what is intended. As the saying goes “all politics is local”; the source of public assistance should be local.

The rich and the middle class need to back and support nothing but libertarian minded candidates, for their own good.

IRS, tax code and excessive regulations increase income inequality by increasing the barriers to competition. The rich create both these monsters by paying lobbyists to influence politicians (money in politics source) to write the code and regulations, as much as they can, in their favor.

The Federal Reserve increases income inequality because cheap money benefits the rich first and most.

The national debt keeps increasing because of deals, aka compromises, between Democrats (social programs and entitlements) and Republicans (corporate welfare and defense). The middle class pays the heaviest burden for the debt; as it goes up, it further increases the inequality gap by lowering their standard of living.

The income inequality mess is the byproduct of their fight over the levers of power.

National Debt:  $17 trillion costs or is financed by each household, who is ultimately responsible for that debt. This comes out to $148,000 per household if paid for in one lump sum. Financed for 15 years at 5% interest it would take a monthly payment of $1170.

Do not be fooled each household pays this one way or another, not the rich; whether you pay it directly in taxes and fees or by a lower standard of living than you would otherwise have if the government had not spent that money.

The question is: Is your household getting its money’s worth?

The rich and middle class have to choose between more competition (libertarian thinking) or higher taxes (Democrats and/or Republicans).

Re-Thinking Income Inequality
FIRSF


Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

One thought on “Re-Thinking Income Inequality