Tenchusatsu, RE: "Z, let's be honest here. The vast majority of Bush's tax cuts did indeed go to the "rich," but that's only because the "rich" pay the vast majority of taxes."
The problem though, based upon math, is simply this:
The rich person can experience accelerated growth, while the wage earning can't. For two reasons:
a) investment growth generally is 10% - when was the last time median wage gain was 10% in this country? Talk about being stuck in the mud. Who ever runs Nasdaq, should be out there talking to people about this and getting more and more people into investments.
b) Also, since the rich person's investment gains exceeds their living expenses, they can pile those gains back into the market for even more gains on top of gains - call this an acceleration of growth. Meanwhile, the wage earner's savings is so small compared to their living expenses. Note the distinction between growth (of investor) and savings (of wage earner) in the preceding sentences. Meaning they can't get over the fence and watch their growth accelerate. They are always stuck there, unless they have investments. The formula really boils down to this: Growth accelerates only when a portfolio's gain starts exceeding the living expense figure. This to me, is the biggest issue. And the solution is to get more wage earners into more and more investments, and to drive spending down to help reach the formula of accelerated growth.
Regards,
Amy J |
