I'm a one issue diarist looking to engage others in beginning steps to "spread the wealth" amassed by the fortunate that threatens our way of life here in the USA. So, here goes. Recently, I read in KOS that our majority leader in the Senate proposes to fund our national highways on the backs of those least able to do it. I suggest an alternative based on the success of California's Prop. 63. Through that measure California increased their state tax 1% on income over $1million. This has raised an average of $1billion annually to address the needs of the mentally ill. Nationally, I propose a graduated/progressive tax that begins with 1% for annual income over $1million, and rises to 2% after $2million, 3% after $3million, etc., until taxpayers reach 25% on income over $25million. Prop. 63 passed in California because there was very little opposition. I hope for the same across the country.
I understand that the economy only does well when money circulates and economic opportunity is contingent on the availability of capital. Both of the former are threatened when wealth is amassed as doing so removes money from the economy. Fixing this problem includes a raise in the minimum wage and some steps to redistribute the stagnant dollars sitting in the coffers of the 1%. When I hear people say that investment of the funds controlled by the 1% lubricates the wheels of the economy, I want to scream that it does not. It is merely used to gamble on the future success of businesses in which the money is invested. This is done at the cost of finding out what future businesses might be created were these funds in the hands of people who would spend it. It is spending that lubricates the wheels of the economy. Investing is important to individuals. Spending, and the ability to do so, is important to us all and therefore the economy in general. When I grew up, 1940's/50's, the middle class consisted of people who worked jobs that did not require a college education. The same could be true today were it possible to acquire the skills necessary to perform essential jobs via the "apprenticeship" route. While unions have some ability to do this, many low and mid-level management positions, as well as technician positions could be filled via this route if such a system existed here. It works in many European countries. Not everyone is suited to pursue a college education. I believe most people are more suited to jobs that are better approached via an apprenticeship. Unfortunately, most of us believe that wealth is the objective of education not some form of fulfillment. Sad.