To reduce inequality, we could do a number of things such as increasing estate taxes; adding a couplefew higher tax brackets for incomes in the millions; allowing only the first, say, million bucks per employee compensation to be tax-deductible to a company (including all benefits such as deferred compensation and stock options); implementing universal health care such as the French or Swiss systems; reinstating sensible financial regulations like Glass-Steagle.______________________ Attacking income inequality is IMO, a tool used by demagogues to placate the liberal constituency and take their focus off the awesome failures that policy after policy has been, and how they all fall apart over time. That is why we see class warfare now THe only argument that we have seen for expanding the economy, the only tool that does any actual good over time, is two fold from the liberal establishment Firstly to increase targeted investment by government Secondly, to increase funding for education to create a 21st century workforce. Other than the abject failure of government to help via the above endeavors, well they will be fully engaged this time, so as we all know this time it will be different. Taking money away from the folks who have figured out how to earn it, make no real sense. Unless your goal is to give stuff away. Leaving money with the folks that people want to give money to, is the way to expand an economy. Create more good stuff Government has an abysmal record in doing this. What have we seen recently regarding sensible regulation? Well everything done has favored large megacorp versus everyone else. The large megacorp benefits were all implemented by liberal Democrats, who also gave massive amounts to miscreants as well as placed them all over government Repeating recipes for disaster and demanding we do more, is just dumb. It is not nearly as insane as the morons laughing at people noticing out policies are leading us to a blind alley(I know that is not you, but what a putz the LOLOLOLOL fool is), but it is still a bad path to tread. We do need rules, we need rules enforced, those rules do have to be good rules, on that we agree. What I see is we need a lot less rules, a lot less folks enforcing them and certainly a lot less centralized planning. We need growth, we need an expanding economy. Government is not the way to create that. Once we have a thriving economy, then start putting in all the things that we see failing now that were all instituted when we were growing and so did not blow up right away. Right now we have to modify all the insanity holding us back, and as any sane organization does cut back to core functionality and allow our people the greatest amount of freedom to seed creative endeavors at all levels of society to take us forward. More government, less money in the hands of those that created success, the punishment of those people by not allowing them to create the legacy they desire by taking away their wealth when they pass, are all bad ideas. Government needs to be the referee not a played, and you want them as not only a player but the star of the team. You could not be more wrong as far as a path to success goes.
Best Of |
Favorites & Replies |
Start a New Board |
My Fool |
BATS data provided in real-time. NYSE, NASDAQ and NYSEMKT data delayed 15 minutes.
Real-Time prices provided by BATS. Market data provided by Interactive Data.
Company fundamental data provided by Morningstar. Earnings Estimates, Analyst Rat