Re: Income inequality benefits the poor.
- From: "The Trucker" <mikcob@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2007 19:15:12 -0800
"Jacques Gambu" <123jgambuxyz@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:E6GdnaWBdO8S2lfYnZ2dnUVZ_ternZ2d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
The rich do not spend all their money so having more money does not add much
to their lifestyle.
Correct. It merely adds to their power to stay rich and powerful.
They invest those extra dollars, raise productivity and benefit society as a
whole.
Why do you believe that the very rich would want to invest? That is actually
quite stupid. Why, if you were the big cheese, would you want ANYTHING
to change?
The poor on the other hand are the first to benefit from more investment
because they spend all their money and their living standard is directly
linked to increased productivity. We can only consume what we produce.
Your ignorant assumption is that the poor, SOMEHOW, have money to
spend. When technological innovation increases productivity the work
force is cut and many have no job and no money.
Many demagogues would like to put their hands on those extra dollars, not to
benefit the poor but to benefit themselves and gain power over people. They
are intelligent people who take advantage of the naivety of their constituency
to build careers promising "free" government programs.
The idle rich want all the money they can hoard, as you say, "to benefit
themselves
and gain power over people".
But the poor would rather have better jobs (more investment) than government
programs. More investment would also help America compete in the world economy
and protect local jobs.
The poor would rather have an income and health care and the like. We do
not want for production. We see ads all day trying to sell the crap being
produced to people who really don't need it. They must be convinced of
the need.
If China and India continue to grow at the rate of the last 10 years, America
to remain competitive will have to invest more. So it is likely that we are
looking forward for more income inequality not less.
China and India will need to start serving themselves as opposed to
serving us. We have had far to little "investment" in our own country.
Increased investments would also have the benefit of solving the Social
Security crisis.
When Clinton was in the oval office we had no SS problem because
we had good jobs that paid good salaries and there was plenty of
FICA tax proceeds.
--
"I know no safe depository of the ultimate powers
of society but the people themselves; and
if we think them not enlightened enough to
exercise their control with a wholesome
discretion, the remedy is not to take it from
them, but to inform their discretion by
education." - Thomas Jefferson
http://GreaterVoice.org
.
- References:
- Income inequality benefits the poor.
- From: Jacques Gambu
- Income inequality benefits the poor.
- Prev by Date: Re: Courage is the Key
- Next by Date: Re: Courage is the Key
- Previous by thread: Re: Income inequality benefits the poor.
- Next by thread: A remberance of Barry Goldwater
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
