Tenchusatsu, RE: "The way most people accumulate wealth is through earning wages."
Why look at how it's done today? Why not change the system?
A forced savings (investment) program, could possibly fix this.
The median USA wedding in the 90's cost $15k - that same $15k could have been $1M for that couple's retirement. The money is there in the system, but people are simply spending it rather than saving. So, forced savings would help address that issue.
Also, it's a lot more efficient for the system to have time grow the wage savings into investments so that the investments pay for retirement, rather than the current situation where wage earners pay for the current batch of retirees (meaning, the soc sec money never has a chance to grow.)
RE: "So in a way, you could argue that income taxes stifle upward mobility."
A forced savings (investment) program would reduce this stifling.
RE: "You'll notice the difference between the "rich" and the truly rich. For example, I'm "rich" but not truly rich. I'm sure you must be, too."
I don't think you or I could claim knowledge to each other's personal wealth, even if we did, I don't see the relevance to it.
The point being made in my prior post, is one of mathematics. The median household could be placed into a much better situation through forced savings whose growth accelerates the accumulation over time. Leaving even more room to assist those in the bottom quartile.
Regards,
Amy J |
