Geee Posted January 2, 2011 Share Posted January 2, 2011 Washington Examiner:Consider one conundrum in American politics. Income inequality has been increasing, according to standard statistics. Yet most Americans do not seem very perturbed by it.Barack Obama may have been elected president after telling Joe the Plumber that he wanted to spread the wealth around. But large majorities in polls approved when Obama and congressional Democrats abandoned oft-repeated campaign promises to raise taxes on high earners in the lame duck session.Why don't voters care more?One reason is that economic statistics can miss important things that affect people's lives. Wages may not have risen much since 1973, but that's partly because the tax code encourages increased compensation in the form of benefits, including health insurance. And it's partly because the Consumer Price Index overstated the effect of inflation in the 1970s, making 1973 wages look higher in "real dollars."Another is that inflation indexes can't fully account for product improvement and technological progress. I bought my first electronic calculator in 1970 for $110. Today you can buy the same gadget for $1.99 at your local drug store. The consumer electronics widely available today at declining prices simply didn't exist in the 1980s. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pinz Posted January 2, 2011 Share Posted January 2, 2011 Michael Barone is not only wicked smart, he has a whole lot of common sense, too. I get the sense that the current administration is stuck in the 60's, fighting those stupid wars that everyone else moved on from once the magic of disco music and polyester leisure suits were revealed to us. Who needs the $$$ of Saks or Nordstrums when the magic sales of WalMart and Target are available to us peasants? Even Trader Joe's can't match the sublime taste of a homegrown tomato! Much of the class envy and resentment of the rich that the Marxists rely on for their lifeblood has been defeated by good old capitalism and American exceptionalism. As Michael Barone says, Bill Gates' house may be huge, but I can eat, play and meet my medical needs pretty much on the same par. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pollyannaish Posted January 2, 2011 Share Posted January 2, 2011 Yep. Barone nails it. The piece that is always overlooked by class warfare pimps is that in places that had Marxist revolutions, the people at the top who were living in posh luxury (while everyone else was starving) were BORN into power and therefore entitled to it, rather than earning it the way the majority of people in this country do. People are happy for those who are able to build fortunes from innovation that benefit society as a whole. Each of the people listed in Barone's article have created and manufactured things for the rest of us. What causes class warfare is things like monarchies where the birthright of a citizen is to live in luxury at the expense of society as a whole. And this is the foundation of the unrest in our own country right now. That unrest is not aimed at rich people as a group. It is aimed at elites in the government and government employee unions that claim to be working for us....while dipping their hand very deep into the public treasury at the regular guys expense. If you want to see where a revolution in this country could be focused...these class warfare folks would do well to start looking in the mirror. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Valin Posted January 2, 2011 Share Posted January 2, 2011 Consider one conundrum in American politics. Income inequality has been increasing, according to standard statistics. Yet most Americans do not seem very perturbed by it. I'm trying really really hard to understand why someone else having more money than someone else is a bad thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pepper Posted January 3, 2011 Share Posted January 3, 2011 Geee And look how much the test scores of our yoot have shot up since those gadgets. Just WOW!!!!! Another is that inflation indexes can't fully account for product improvement and technological progress. I bought my first electronic calculator in 1970 for $110. Today you can buy the same gadget for $1.99 at your local drug store. The consumer electronics widely available today at declining prices simply didn't exist in the 1980s. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chickadee Posted January 3, 2011 Share Posted January 3, 2011 I am one of those who is quite satisfied with what I have. I do not wish to fall into mediocrity by just being satisfied with the status quo, so will strive for betterment, but it's not to keep up with the Joneses, it is a matter of keeping us out of the trailer park, so to speak. But I certainly agree that this feeling of satisfaction is helped because I work at being a smart shopper. I have NO desire to go to Saks or whatever just to say that is where I shop. I find joy in finding the best bargain anywhere. I also find myself feeling guilty because we have so much "stuff" while others do not. Though worried about how the cutbacks in Social Security will affect our fixed income, I still feel fortunate. B U T about the ELITE part, Polly I could not agree more. There are elites at ever level of income and intellect. If you think you are an elite, I will most likely rail against you. Snobs are still snobs and don't score highly in my book. The only acceptable elite are the superb people here at The Right Reasons, IMO! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nickydog Posted January 3, 2011 Share Posted January 3, 2011 I agree with everything you said, Chickadee. (But that's not very surprising.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now