|
The reason more people haven't accumulated wealth in America is not because the rich class has taken it away from the middle class. Rather, it's because the middle class has not saved and has instead chosen to accumulate debt. The government, largely chosen by the middle class, has done the same. I don't see how taxing more will help reverse this. On the contrary, it will make the problem worse. Government policy since the founding of the Federal Reserve seems designed to discourage the accumulation of wealth. Government taxes income (i.e., the productive use of time), earnings on savings (capital gains), profits, accumulated wealth directly (by the death tax). In addition, the value of money has been steadily eroded. A century ago, when the federal reserve was founded, an ounce of gold was $20. Now it's about $1400. Besides penalizing the accumulation of wealth, the government encourages it's opposite: debt. Interest is tax-deductible. Government aid for food, housing, education, and medical care is available, as long as you haven't accumulated any wealth. Big (wealthy) businesses are under more regulation than small (mainly poor) businesses. With this kind of government policy, it's no wonder that more people don't accumulate wealth. Accumulated wealth is a good thing. It makes liberty worthwhile and meaningful. It enables innovation. It provides security. Wealth also allows for independence which is why most politicians tend not to like it: a wealthy person's vote cannot be bought so easily with a government handout. PG is in the business of helping people become wealth accumulators (i.e., rich). He counsels saving money, minimizing expenses, living frugally, avoiding debt, so that a person can devote the maximum energy towards building wealth. I don't see why he would support government policies designed to encourage the opposite. |