Quote:
Originally Posted by firebug
I disagree.
I would contend that ones wealth at age 50 has far more to do with when, where and to whom one was born than "Doing a whole lot more".
The fallacy of 'meritocracy' is harmful to both the rich and the poor.
|
Yes, being born into wealth/education increases the odds - US is trending toward that more and more, as attested to at the highest level by the Bush and Clinton families. That said, I have done "a whole lot more" than Bubba, so why should I subsidize Bubba?
This is far more complex than "tax the rich to give to the poor". The whole system is rotten, and you won't fix it with more welfare. The US is too big, too populous, too diverse (in every sense of the term) to be subject to "easy" solutions that might work for smaller societies, such as Sweden and Norway. This almost requires a re-invention of the whole system. Who knows? Perhaps we are witnessing a replay of the fall of the Roman Empire... I don't know - frankly, I don't have enough economic knowledge to come up with a "good" answer...