Monday, June 18, 2012
On the Idiocy of the 1% Versus 99% Construct
a) It presumes homogeneity and permanence and clearly their isn't any. More than half of the people in the top 1% in 1996 were out of it by 2005 and that group as a whole (the actual human beings, I'm saying, and not the category, 1%) saw their income drop a full 26%. Couple that with the huge variability that exists within these groups (the 99%ers, for example, would include a 50 year-old hospital administrator making $170,000 a year and a 19 year-old fry-cook making minimum wage at McDonald's) and the absurdity becomes even more heightened.............b) It presumes that all of our problems can be solved by simply raising taxes on the wealthy. The fact of the matter is that even if we taxed everything over $250,000 a year at 100%, we would still have a deficit (never mind the negative effect that it would have on the economy - individuals generally spend their money more constructively and intelligently than the government) and that doesn't even take into account all of the other spending that lunatics like Krugman want to foist upon us. It's absurd.............c) It totally ignores, or at least skews, many of the other other issues that are presently hampering us. It doesn't, for example, address the fact that the American public school system is currently being rammed into the ground by a hugely bureaucratic, monopolistic, and recalcitrant pair of teacher's unions, or the fact that African-American illegitimacy is 4 times what it was 70 years ago, even though the African-American poverty rate was 4 times GREATER 70 years ago.............And d) have you actually seen some of these people (the guy who Hannity interviewed made Hannity look like Karl Popper). Not that the Tea-Partiers are necessarily some of the sharper tools in the shed, either, mind you, but at least they seemingly bathe.