Correcting a Misdistribution

Higher taxes for those with great wealth has often been described, derogatorily, as a “redistribution of wealth”. I believe it is much more accurate to classify appropriate taxation as “correcting a misdistribution of wealth” rather than “redistributing the wealth”. 

This might be the simplest way to express the need to shift our thinking into using capitalism and appropriate taxation to build an economy for all—one that is fair to all, and good to all. This shift would not be a brand new philosophy. It would basically be a return to the model used from 1933 to 1981, which is essentially the New Deal approach. During those years, we built the largest middle class in history, and we were making continuous gains in building an economy for all. 

Under our current economic structure, there are those whose wealth increases at a rate of well over 1 million dollars an hour, 24 hours a day. This is with no additional effort on their part. This is greater than the combined hourly pay of over 66,000 workers making $15/hour. This is what I mean by a “misdistribution of wealth”. This is what needs to be corrected.

I believe that most of us (well over 50% of us) would benefit economically from a return to the Roosevelt approach, which I will also call the Progressive approach, or Progressivism. And I believe that 100% of us would benefit from living in a happier, less-divided country. It will be impossible to ever “unite” on an economy that produces lords and serfs. That will necessarily produce division amongst us. And has. To be more united—less divided, we must unite on the side of an economy for all.

The next few articles will address my belief that we need a paradigm shift in our economic philosophy. Ronald Reagan accomplished a paradigm shift in the 1980s, but I believe, and hope to convince the reader in future articles, that it was a shift in the negative direction; a shift away from a great economy for all. We need to return to the model that builds an economy for all, the Progressive model.