Dr. James Piereson at the Manhattan Institute has lambasted the rhetoric animating the convictions of team Obama’s ‘income inequality’ slogan that is to be used among progressives to shield them from the non-performance that is Obama’s Presidency.
Let’s get a look at this claim.
This crusade is based on three claims. One is that the wealthy are all benefitting from Wall Street’s rising stock and real estate prices (read Q.E.), another is that such people unfairly benefit from a system that taxes capital gains at half the highest marginal rate of those who earn their living through salaries/wages.
Let’s get to the facts.
There are 1.1 million households in the top 1%. To enter this category, you need to earn at least $307,000 annually.
According to the CBO (Congressional Budget Office), this top 1% are salaried executives at NON-FINANCE businesses who have earned their income at small/medium size businesses: NOT THE LARGE FIRMS THAT DOMINATE WALL STREET.
Did we forget professional athletes, artists, actors, coaches. In a word: PERFORMERS that PERFORM in a highly competitive environment through the voluntary patronage of American consumers.
These top earners are salaried!
As Dr. Emanuel Saez from the University of California, Berkeley has shown, “the top earners are not rentiers who derive their incomes from past wealth. They’re ‘working rich’, highly paid employees or new entrepreneurs.”
“At a time of slow economic growth, mounting government debt, stalemated politics and an impending boom in retirement of baby boomers, the attack on the 1%’ers is a diversion from the nations real problems.”
The attack on the private sector, especially the rhetorical claim that earning income is evil; that civil society and its adherents are unworthy of socialist utopia must be derided for the insanity it produces.