(cc photo: Antony Theobald)
This is the headline over a USA Today op-ed (10/7/13) by Scott Winship of the right-wing Manhattan Institute:
Income Inequality, Growth Go Together
Whereas the article says:
When research finds a connection between economic growth rates and inequality levels, as often as not higher inequality tends to correspond to higher growth.
This is a dubious claim as well. But it’s not at all the same as the sweeping assertion made in the headline.
The text is the more sophisticated spin to persuade people who care about inequality to care about it a little less; the headline is the takeaway the public is supposed to remember next time they hear about a proposal for cutting taxes for the wealthy. Either way, the Koch brothers and other funders of the Manhattan Institute are getting their money’s worth.
UPDATE: Scott Winship notes on Twitter (10/9/13) that he doesn’t write USA Today‘s headlines. Of course he does not. But when you write a line like “as often as not higher inequality tends to correspond to higher growth,” you are acknowledging that there is not a tendency for inequality to correspond to higher growth—otherwise the connection would appear more often than “as often as not”—while at the same time hoping that people will misread you as saying that there is such a tendency. In other words, you’re trying to get people to misunderstand you in exactly the way the headline writer did.
Well, sure, that makes sense.
As income decreases for the poor, through endless taxes they cannot pay, and higher prices at huge chain stores that have taken over every community everywhere, money flows to the wealthy. Wealthier people benefit from growth.
What part did you not get? :p
As the inequality grows, so does the stomachs and butts of the uber-wealthy. So Inequality does lead to higher (larger) growth, Of the rich.
By “growth” he means GDP, and since 95% of the benefit of the GDP increase flows to the wealthy, the “growth” is quite literally the source of income inequality. This is the way our ‘rigged game’ economic system is currently constructed; if you have no capital in the rigged game, you simply will not see any income growth, and “as often as not” you’ll see negative income growth. It’s time to stop being afraid to point out that this broken version of Capitalism does not work for anyone but the wealthy.
Obviously, income inequality is a given, but when income shifts dramatically and drastically away from middle and low income levels to the rich and ultra rich, both demand for goods and economic growth decline. Unfortunately the rich and ultra rich, who now have control of the federal government, just don’t care, which is leading us to ruin.
Each to their ability each to their needs is the Obama creed
I will immediately snatch your rss as I can not to find your e-mail subscription hyperlink or e-newsletter service. Do you’ve any? Kindly allow me understand in order that I may subscribe. Thanks.
Income inequality is a tough nut to crack.Its tentacles are many, and varied.Only two ways to create the conditions for any chance of equality(hate that word).One is to allow for the recreation of wealth.Low taxes ,open markets that will allow people the opportunity to give it a go.Note that 50 billionaires were asked if they could recreate their success today if they were again young men.Fifty said NO!Not a good poll at all.Home depot owner gave a long speech on why it would be damn near impossible today due to government involvement.That is the last thing we want to hear folks.
The second way is redistribution of all wealth.That will work well for short time.Then it will be a depreciating liability.Less rich.Less success.Subsidize those who fail tax those who succeed.Ten years we will be in a free fall.See the middle class will grow when jobs are exploding.North Dakota is a good example.Gas boom there.Jobs are plentiful.Even walmart is starting its people at 17 dollars per hour.And funding for the poor there is completely funded.Always works folks.And Obamas way always fails.See most Americans are conservative and have personal responsibility.Naturally.When was the last time a neighbor banged on your door to ask you to help put their kid through school?Or for money to buy a coat for their son?Or for food?Gas money?Insurance?Never.But we elect people who do exactly that FOR us!Look you are never gonna have Bill Gates money.You also are never going to employ thousands of people world wide.If Bill had been effectively stopped from having the opportunity to “conquer the world”.Held in check at his first million.Think of what the world would of lost.See the government cant pick and choose winners and losers.They can only get out of the way.But as we re create wealth opportunities will flourish.
An excellent demonstration of wording propaganda! ” as often as not”= 50%50%= o trend, the old dribble down economics sophistry.
Janine Im sure it makes me the big dumb American because we(I) don’t speak your native tongue.Fact is though that most of us still converse in English and dont want to look up translations.So um…..Come again!
And Tross your problem solving is a bit off.Trickle down economics can be stated this way… BM +P = % to NM.That is ..Big money plus profit equals a percentage of profit to no money(worker).It is the only model that works in economics.Well there is one other. Takeaway p(profit) from BM(bigmoney) to give to NM(workers)= 0.As in we all go broke.All equal.All broke
Trickle down only works one way, those at the top trickle down on the workers. The stupid damned theory has NOT worked since Reagen blew smoke up our ass 30 years ago, and it has not changed.
And for the record, one of the most prosperous time in america was when the Uber wealth were being taxed at 75%. So take the damn Trickle Down and go trickle on yourself.
Huh? Sorry, NoDifference, but the poor pay virtually no income taxes.
Wow, m.e., you’re as bad as you ever were. Where do you come up with that bullshit? You better get your memo to the Germans; what with their high employee pay and benefits and the fact that by law a common worker has to sit on the board of a company, involved in decision-making. The USA comes up real short in all the categories that mark a modern, civilized democracy.
Padre…..You dont get it.So lets simplify.The Us economy is based on new businesses starting up.This is the blood of our economy.Over tax that and it slows.Recently a cadre of billionaires got together and agreed that they could not do it again if they were young under the currant tax laws.People like Home dep founder.That is devastating.75 % tax just means you are trusting the government to do better with your money that you can do yourself.And only idiots dont see that under Reagan this country exploded.His only fault……allowing Dem factions to still spend too much(his words)So if you can tell me who it is who works for a poor man you win this argument.If you can prove government is a better steward of your money than you are ,you win again.If you actually believe a tax on those who succeed to subsidize those who fail should be above 75%…..you are a stone cold num nut.
Just was thinking,with the dollar so devalued(being worth about 60 cents and falling fast.)..and with various taxes already taking more than 50% of our money…Im trying to factor in 75% on what is left.Then if you amass enough the gov takes 50% of that(already taxed numerous times)upon your death.Oh hell why work at all.And you could not figure that out?
Hi there!Others have voiced my confusion above, but it’s awesome sometimes to add towards the melee. I’ve been signed up since the middle of January, but have three letters. They’re excellent letters! But similarly, I’d like to know if this is just the process of your dust settling or if this is to be expected?Thanks!