So if a good job market and rising wages is not the answer, what is? What exactly do you want to do to make the people happy?
The middle class simply doesn't have either the spending power or the economic influence it once had, and income inequality is the worst it has been since we recorded data:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/busi...n-since-census-started-tracking-it-data-show/. Those are facts, and we are choosing to not address them.
We are choosing to kill capitalism by not managing it. We need more controls both at the corporate level (such as stock buy-backs and how corporations can direct money, returning Glass Steagall or something like it, and de facto monopolies, for starters) and the individual level (adding new margins on the top end to deal with the rapidly expanding wealth disparities). We can make changes to how unions and benefits operate to increase income to the middle class without financially crippling employers.
As a capitalist, I'm not really thrilled to suggest those things. But I choose to look at reality: In any given socio-economic system, there will be a small percentage of the populace who simply have a much better personal capacity for creating wealth. That will invariably lead to imbalances that can't be ignored.
Do you want to know why socialism is becoming so popular? It's because we're not managing capitalism properly, disparity is only increasing as a (predictable) result, and people are looking for other options. The longer we choose to be stupid, the more progress socialism will make here. And these people VOTE.
.
Thanks for the specifics Mac. I know dealing with the ignorant is frustrating, but I'll need a little help here. Are you basically suggesting caps for corporations and individuals? I have no problem with empowering the middle class as long as it is not something like wage fixing. As long as the market determines prices, I'm pretty open to ideas. I don't think anyone is thrilled with all of the obvious monopolies. Thanks again.
No, not caps.
First of all, I think we should keep corporate tax rates low. Let's let our corporations make shitloads of money, as the market will bear. The question is, what happens to that money? If the corporation invests that money in its people in the form of higher wages, better benefits, and higher-quality jobs, great. If it uses it to buy back stock, make highly-leveraged mergers or pay insane bonuses, we have to look at that. So in this case, controls exist so that the company works in its best interest, in its shareholders' best interest, but in a way that also is in its people's best interests.
Then, of course, controls and regulations need to be better and more efficient so that markets are protected. The Meltdown of 2008 was all about that, and it appears that we learned very little there.
It's on the individual side that I'd add four new margins on the top end (along with other tax tweaks). This is what I meant when I said that there are some people who are naturally better-equipped to create wealth within a given system.
I fully understand and appreciate free markets, and the dynamics and potential of capitalism. But leaving it alone to run wild will only (a) increase imbalances and (b) increase the possibility of more and more socialism when enough people have had enough.
.
