[ntSean]

You point towards regulation as the culprit of innovation being killed; I wonder how you are not aware most people live pay-check to pay-check, and therefore can not adopt the risk necessary to be entrepreneurial?

We all, live in an extremely divided economic landscape - the _most_ divided in modern history.

I do not understand how this is not a focus of your argument. With this in mind, if our government offers support to the individual; we can innovate freely without imposing further employer regulation on private businesses. In a globalist society, where jobs are exported to the most exploitative country, this seems to be a promising solution.

[CryptoPunk]

The savings rate in China is 40%. Economists have observed a negative correlation between the personal savings rate and the availability of a social safety net. In societies where the state does not provide a substantial safety net, people adapt by saving high percentage of their income, and this is why the savings rate in China is so high.

Incomes are higher today than during the periods in American history when economic growth rates were highest, so the fact that more people are living paycheck to paycheck is more likely explained by the establishment of a comprehensive social safety net reducing the incentive to build up personal savings.

Social welfare spending has massively increased over the course of the last several decades.

[atlgator]

You're going from one extreme to another. Starting your own business is not the only alternative to working for big business. There is a remarkable difference between working at Lockheed Martin and working at SpaceX, for example. One is arguably a lot more innovative than the other. And you do know that politicians are responsible for globalism right? It can be curtailed as easily as it was expanded.