Let’s look at the
different types of governments and different models of society throughout
history. There can be little doubt that the more leftward a society leans, the
more the poor suffer. Is there any doubt that even if you are poor, it is far
better to be poor in a free market democracy like the US instead of the old
Soviet Union, Cuba, or Vietnam? Isn’t it interesting to see how, in more modern
times, places like China experience tremendous economic growth through the
embrace of capitalistic policies (the same that made America a superpower)? At
the same time, we are seeing liberal Democrats in America embrace some of the
same policies that led to hundreds of millions of Chinese, Cubans, and
Vietnamese living in huts on less than a dollar a day!
I wonder, would today’s
liberals claim that those with special skills should not be paid more than
those without those skills. Take for an example, would liberals like President Obama
or Al Gore or Bill Clinton give their millions of dollars to the poor or would
they refuse to work for a low salary or income level in order to equalize their
money resources with a day laborer. This is a nonsense question. Nobody thinks
that income equalization at that level would be a good idea. It is necessary
for those with special skills and abilities to be paid more than others.
But, a
not-so-nonsensical question is this. If these wealthy liberals do not wish to
give away their wealth, why should Joe Middleclass be asked to give his income
away in a governmental redistribution scheme?
In order to assess the
needs of the poor in America, we need to look at their economic situation
straight in the eye. Being a “poor” American is not nearly as bad as you might
think. More than 80 percent of poor Americans have cell phones, televisions,
and refrigerators. Most also own a motor vehicle and have more living space
than the average European. On top of all this, immigrants from all over the
world still want to come here for a chance at a better life. This would not be
happening if “poor” Americans were living in squalor.
One wonders if liberals
and their obsessions about income inequality are really only making themselves
feel good. Or…are they appealing to low information voters who think that these
policies will have some real effects. I suspect that the liberal cry for income
equality is an appeal for votes to those on government welfare who may not be
particularly interested in bettering themselves.
I think a much better
way to address the problem of income inequality is to stimulate business by
eliminating today’s onerous regulations and tax burdens. Let business go—it has
been an efficient engine for job creation in the past; and it can produce the
jobs needed to equalize income better than government redistribution programs.
(This blog post was
redacted from downtrend.com 1/5/14.)
No comments:
Post a Comment