Family Fun, Continued

Here is my reply to my Uncle Mike's last email, in which he complained of Obama's communist income redistribution policies. Refer to the Family Fun Feud post to read his email.

Hey Mike,

I think this is where we may come to an ideological stand still. It seems that one of your main issues with Obama is his tax policies, which you earlier claim are fairly meaningless for a presidential candidate. Either way, you say that his increasing taxes on people making more than 250K is income redistribution. I think it is less black and white, and more shades of Grey. Our country has income redistribution right now. People at the top pay more taxes on a percentage and total basis than people on the bottom. People on the bottom, logically, receive more in social benefits (i.e. food stamps, unemployment, etc.) than people at the top.

This does not mean that we are socialist or communist, just because we have some form of income redistribution. It has been well proven that trickle-down economics, the idea that relieving the tax burdens on the rich and corporations will grow the economy and benefit the lower class, doesn't work. I just read, from an economist journal, that approximately 3-4% of tax breaks to the wealthy actually make it down the economic ladder. In fact, 75% of the economic growth in the last 8 years has gone to those at the top 1%. The middle and lower classes have been waiting to "get wet" under the Republican's trickle-down economics for the last 8 years. They simply haven't seen any benefits. Why is it unfair to employ policies that ensure that every child in this country has the opportunity to receive a good education and be guaranteed health insurance? Shouldn't we as a country find it important to ensure that everyone has access to some level of basic necessities? I think you have to ignore alot of problems in this country to claim that there is equal opportunity for all. There certainly isn't anywhere near equal opportunity for all in this country, when children don't have access to health care or legitimate education and many families can't afford to send their children to college.

Where does your income, as someone earning at the top of the ladder, come from? How is it supported in a capitalist society? Your ability to earn a great deal comes from a wide-base of much poorer wage earners. Without these millions of people willing to work for 8 or 10 dollars an hour, the cost of operating almost every business in this country would become prohibitive. Wage earners are NECESSARY for this capitalist system to function. So, the relationship between wage earners and people making 250K a year is quite real. The relationship between people over the age of 25 and under the age of 25 is entirely arbitrary. I don't think the comparison is legitimate. I do not think that Obama or the democrats' policies are aimed to force everyone into an equal standard of living. Instead, I think they are designed to finally bring to the struggling middle class and lower class basic opportunities and necessities that they require.

You talk about it being unfair that the majority of americans, the 95% of Americans making under 250K, would be allowed to vote to capture more earnings from the top 5%. Why, in the world, then, would the opposite be more fair? Under McCain, capital gains taxes, which effect only those at the very top of the income ladder, will receive significant tax breaks, while the majority of Americans see little benefits. Oil companies will receive billions in tax breaks under McCain, yet the idea of a middle class family struggling to get by receiving an additional $2000 in tax cuts, allowing them to pay their health insurance premiums, is unfair??

I think that the top income earners in this country enjoy a great deal of advantages, through corporate tax policies, government provided infrastructure, cheap labor from wage earners, subsidies, trade policy, tax breaks, etc. So, from this perspective, I do not think it is socialist or communist, or unfair income distribution, to say that some percentage of the great benefits reaped by those at the top should be captured and distributed to the middle and lower classes, so that they can be ensured basic services and necessities. I think this is the best way to reach equal opportunity in this country.

Jeremy