
Inequality: The 1% solution - ecounysis
http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2011/04/inequality?fsrc=scn%2Ftw%2Fte%2Fbl%2Fthe1solution
======
ataggart
Lest the Stiglitz bandwagon go wholly unchallenged, here's a great reply by
Russ Roberts:

<http://cafehayek.com/2011/04/theres-no-their-there.html>

Since the link to the source of the (preconception shattering)
intergenerational income graph he references is borked, here is a correct one:

[http://www.economicmobility.org/assets/pdfs/PEW_EMP_GETTING_...](http://www.economicmobility.org/assets/pdfs/PEW_EMP_GETTING_AHEAD_FULL.pdf)

------
lionhearted
> I think this [Reagan-era] ideology is bad: bad for the economy, bad for
> society...

I think Regan is popularly overrated in a lot of areas, but if you're looking
to analyze the impact his policies had on the economy, you have to note two
important points:

1\. Total federal tax income _rose_ after the Reagan-era tax cuts. There's
plenty of potential reasons why, but you've got to give serious thought to the
idea that we were at an inoptimum point in the Laffer Curve before that:

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laffer_curve>

2\. It's absolutely a fact that as people get wealthier, their spending shifts
from consumption to investment. So it's pretty straightforward to see that
larger fortunes _without falling tax yields_ means more funds for investment.

Even if you don't like Reagan, you've got to give serious thought to the idea
that the Reagan-era cuts played a significant part in the rapid growth of the
technology sector that's come to fruition the last 20 years. That's created
one of the largest increases in wealth for everyone in the United States in
history.

But anyways, ex-libertarian here. I'd be in favor of more government spending
in infrastructure and sciences. I think Reagan's domestic policy is overrated.
But you've got to give some serious thought to the idea that the tax cuts led
to a lot of the economic growth of the last 20 years - higher tax yields and
higher private wealth leading to higher investment is really good mix for
economic growth.

~~~
Anechoic
> _You've got to give serious thought to the idea that the Reagan-era cuts
> played a significant part in the rapid growth_

Or it could have been the tax _increases_ :
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax_Equity_and_Fiscal_Responsib...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax_Equity_and_Fiscal_Responsibility_Act_of_1982#cite_note-
taxtable-1)

