Please point me to any leftist, or Democrat policy which suggested confiscating most of the inheritance with taxes. I'm not sure what narrative about which you are talking. Most of us want to make it more likely for the poor to become wealthy. Do you understand that the U.S. has fallen in their ranking of how easy it is for the poor to move up in their wealth? Nations like Canada, France, Denmark, Sweden, etc. all have a system where it is easier for the poor to become rich.
Maybe Sam can correct me here but I don't think he's rooting for a violent upheaval...just saying that it is inevitable if the Government doesn't stop it from getting worse. Eventually, the poor become poor enough that they have little to lose. When you take away their distractions and make them struggle day to day just to survive, you are playing with fire. "When a majority of the people are hungry and cold they will take by force what they need" As for it working or not, that's up for discussion I feel. If the government being toppled is corrupt then it has to go. Literature from our founders basically call for a revolution if the people are unhappy with their country. I'm not saying we are close to this point, the poor in America still are somewhat more comfortable than poor in other countries.
LOL! You not only change the words of my original post but the words you used don't have anything at all to do with the message or theme of my post. Is that what it takes for you to have a conversation? Go right ahead... But maybe next time you make up a theme or message that I'm saying maybe you could have my post be about fighting ogres, trolls, goblins, orcs, and a chimera. Ha!
Your reply was criticism toward my concern about my own wealth and well being. You want me to worry about other people's wealth? Like I said: rent is due the first of every month.
We live in a winner-take-all rat race. You can "choose" not to work more than forty hours a week, just like you can "choose" not to take your full 2 week paternity leave... People wonder why Socialist Europe is always brought up as an example, well it's because catch phrases like "work-life balance" actually mean something rather than a tagline for a job posting. People have a month off for their holiday and the world doesn't burn because of it. There's less of a homeless problem, who would've thought? Of course there's tradeoffs to that model. It depends on what our priorities are and what we're willing to accept as the bottom.
No, it wasn't a criticism. I'm on your side. I merely suggested doing that which will lead to a greater chance and opportunity for wealth. To make the most of that opportunity you might want to not only worry about other people's wealth but the economy in general. What I was suggesting was that you adopt strategies that will help you meet that rent and have opportunity maximize your chances.
[ Lol, I'm not advocating for a violent revolution, but if you want to look at things that have been tried - a regime that oppresses 90-99% of its populace by funneling resources ever upward has a pretty dismal shelf life.
Coming from Canada, I would respectfully disagree. The middle class is more accessible, but becoming rich is harder because you are taxed at a higher rate. I came down to the US specifically because if you are a high performer, you have more opportunity here. That's why most people in the world want to emigrate to the US. You have a higher chance of becoming independently wealthy, which I define as not depending on the government for your retirement income. I tried to read the whole article, but halfway through I realized that many of the arguments are quite similar to the communist manifesto. Yes, it's true that in freer economic societies people who make good decisions and learn how to game the system whether by themselves or via training from their parents will rise to the top. This effect will be compounded over time. However, it's not true that economic disparity will lead to violent revolution. Violent revolution has historically been rare without a critical mass of people who are starving (willing to take deathly risks). The poor in our society are very unlikely to become rich - but they also have the highest standard of living of any underclass in history. I agree that we should do more to help encourage financial mobility - but welfare and similar programs only exacerbate the problem. Financial and economic decision-making should be embedded into high school curriculums, but that will only help the people who have a long enough decision-making horizon. If you plan and make sacrifices on a multiple-year horizon, you can be financially successful in America. Almost every construct in society leads you in the other direction however. It's not surprising - the government wants you to be dependent on them.
I appreciate your perspective. I was referencing studies done and published. Either way what actually matters is that the more the wealth is concentrated the less of a chance others have to break into the top 1%.
There was huge income disparity during Obama's term. A lot of the current disparity is driven by the stock market. I think the minimum wage should be raised and I think the estate tax is a fair tax on the beneficiary in terms of income. However wages for low skilled jobs are depressed by immigration and international competition. You can funnel more money into education
