“…Over the past two years, there has been a significant political debate in the United States about the distribution of wealth.
Statistics suggest that in 2007, the richest 1% of the population controlled about 35% of the wealth in the US -
- and that the top 20% controlled about 85% of the wealth.
People who approve of this distribution in wealth typically argue that the wealthiest Americans have earned their money through hard work and individual effort -
- and that their business practices, spending patterns, and investments ultimately improve the quality of life for everyone.
Those who disapprove of this distribution argue that government and social policies helped the wealthiest Americans to develop their wealth.
They typically support policies that would redistribute wealth by levying higher taxes on the richest Americans and using that money for policies that would support people with fewer resources.
It is clear that many Americans who are not in wealthiest 20% support policies that maintain the inequality in the distribution of wealth.
Over the past fifteen years, tax rates have been cut across the board and attempts to increase tax rates on the wealthiest 1 to 2% of Americans have been blocked.
The politicians who have blocked these tax increases have been re-elected.
Clearly, many people are voting for these candidates, suggesting that there is broad support for the current inequality in wealth.
Why is that?..”
(ed:…and of coure we could ask that question of new zealanders..
..many of them voting for parties/policies that are directly contradictory to their personal circumstances/interests..
..’why is that’..?..)
go to source/story>>>