Oh well, guess I was wrong. Now, to your two states, I got news for you, rather everyone works or not does not make a happy damn. It really doesn't. Your position, and your viewpoint, has no basis in economics whatsoever. It has no basis in anthropology or sociology. It is completely based on your obsession with what OTHER PEOPLE ARE DOING. Here is a thought, focus on yourself.
Why is it you on the left say focus on ourselves when we give our hard earned money to other people, yet you say focus on millionaires and billionaires when it comes time to taking money that other people made?
It's like the HUD house next door to me. Why is HUD using my money to support lowlifes in the suburbs? I shouldn't be concerned about that? I have to go to work every day to live here. I have to get up early in the morning whether it''s a beautiful day that I'd rather be spending at home or when it's 3 degrees outside and I have to trudge through the snow to get in my car at 6:00 am.
You bet it's my business, especially when they come home at 2 or 3 in the morning playing their car radio, slamming doors, laughing out loud because they are so Fn drunk and high, and wake me up when I have to get up in three hours for work!
To keep it simple, well five people live in your state and five people live in mine. In your state one dude earns $900,000, the other four earn $25,000 each. The one dude can't spend all his money and he is too chicken shit to invest any. He RENTS $300,000 a year to the other four, collects interest, and saves that as well.
In my state one dude works and the other four all sit on their ass. The one dude makes a million a year, but we tax him $400,000 that we re-distribute, yeah, that dirty word, to the other four. Which economy will have more spending and more demand? Before you answer, do you know anything about the United Arab Emirates? You ever hear of this city call Dubai? I mean if the key to success is everyone working and nobody getting free shit, well the UAE would be crumbling to the ground. Instead, the exact opposite happened.
Let me put it another way: which city does better, the city with a lot of government dependents or a city with few or none? I live in the Cleveland suburbs. Before inner-city people started to move in here during the housing bubble, our city was great. They had money, crime was down, drugs were few and far in between, our schools were rated one of the best in the county. Home values were up.
Now compare that to the city of Cleveland itself. They are broke, they lack enough police protection, their schools are the worst, many of the city vehicles are ten years old or more. Streets get plowed in the winter time, but very slowly because of lack of equipment and help. Side streets sometimes have to wait days to get their street plowed.
When more people are working, that means better city services, better investment for people that wish to invest, creates a housing demand because other working people want to move in there.