I'll keep my political and economic opinions to myself except to say one thing. Something is going to give, what it will be is anyone's guess, but methinks it won't be pretty.

Aside from that -

 

The real mistake is thinking that politics can be a substitute for economics. Free markets can solve complex problems in hours instead of missing the mark for centuries.

The tragedy is that many cannot seem to distinguish between economics and politics.

Detroit has proven to be an excellent example of what happens when logic is replaced by politics. Half of the population has fled in the last fifty years.

There is an easy method to enhance economic recovery, but it doesn't fit the current template.

Take a look at how many high ranking politicos have ended up in Federal prison. It is a majority.

 

Income Inequality is a euphemism for the politics of envy, which always lead to "redistribution", which in turn is a eumphemism for property theft.

Inequality is the natural state of the world, and even tyranny can't change that. Tyrants and their elite bureaucracies are seldom the equals of those they subjugate. Mao didn't starve to death along with millions of his people; and the greatest concentration of wealth in America today is in the sixty mile radius surrounding Washington D.C., the very enclave of people who are creating the inequality that they condemn. We choose to have equal rights, but we will never have equal ability or motivation, and these are reflected in unequal life outcomes.

 

I dig how people can't look at the economy without defaulting to politics.
Interesting.

Sure we can go there.
Democrats: middle out economics, sure whatever.
Republican: trickle down economics, riiiiiiight.

In either case the money change hands.
You can make it but you must spend it and when you don't spend it the economy takes the hit.

It is very simple yet very involved in application. It is detailed and nuanced, to have a true economic debate while clad in a particular parties colors is obscenely stupid.

 

It isn't just political. It goes to beliefs about life itself. About what is good and true and fair. Since both parties start from diametrically opposing points of view, is it any wonder they can't agree on politics which is a continuation of those fundamental beliefs?

Another way to view 'income equality" is the “Liberal Pie Syndrome,” sometimes it's genetic and very often it's contagious.

Symptoms include rash emotionalism and hyper-focusing of the brain and mouth on the belief that life is a pie and "if somebody has a big piece, they are making my piece smaller."

 

I would suggest that you listen to a talk Hedrick Smith gave at Williams College a while ago. Mr. Smith wrote the book "Who Stole the American Dream". Mr. Smith has quite a resume as both a reporter and author. The talk is 1:04 and well worth the time. A good history lesson of what has happened.

Hedrick Smith '55 - Who Stole the American Dream? - YouTube

 

The NYT and its staff hold an interesting position, and Smith is one of those. More gov above all, all day every day. Damn the cost.

Here is a simple question: What is your greatest expense every year and what does it buy you, do you have any choice at all about this expense?

Hint:Plutocrats have never forced you to buy anything.

 

Pitchfork Marches tend to fall apart when participants notice that their neighbor has a better pitchfork. If they are unaware of this fork maldistribution, the plutocrats will point it out, then watch the fight.

 

Hint: Plutocrats have rigged the system so the 99+% of the US population no longer have the disposable income that kept the economy growing during the 1950s, 60s, and 70s.

The light airplane market is one that even pilots should understand. Cessna Aircraft built and sold 12,254 C172 aircraft during years 1962-1972. During those eleven years the production rate average was 1114 with the 1966 high year with 1597 produced and the 1970 low year with 759. Give the fact that the US population has grown 30% since then I would expect a much improved number. The two most recent years available show that the C172 is still manufactured but the production number is not the 1962-72 average of 1114 + 30%. Production has dropped 90% with 113 built in 2012, and 106 built in 2013.
The sad fact is in the days Cessna had customers with enough money to buy a C172 most households had one income, not the two that we consider normal today.

 

Who rigged the system and why? Is it tinfoil time again? What is it you think they took from you? Try to be honest and tell us in your own words which plutocrat took your money and why.

Don't you understand Plutocrats very much want to keep the economy growing, most of your Cessna cost is wrapped up in Liability-paying lawyers to keep fools off their back.


Let us try this one more time, it is a very simple question:

What is your greatest expense every year and what does it buy you, do you have any choice at all about this expense? The answer is right there on your W2, it has its own line, but that is only part of the story.

Hint:Plutocrats have never forced you to buy anything.

Now just answer the simple question and stop with the tinfoil antics. The answer is right in front of you printed in black and white, no need for mysterious mumbojumbo about secret clans of plutocrats trying to wreck the economy they depend on. They depend on that economy, let that sink in and then try to make sense.