Skip to main content

something is wrong

There is a reason that charging higher marginal tax rates is catching on even among Republican voters: people are seeing a broken system where some are benefitting greatly while a large majority are increasingly losing out.

Income disparity has become a huge problem in America and it is getting worse. However the answer isn't about the rich throwing dollar bills out the window but rather returning to paying their fair share as they did during the greatest economic growth period in the country's history; a time when those marginal rates were sometimes as high as 91%.

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's proposal is hardly revolutionary: increase marginal rates for every dollar above 10 million. This money will then get fed back into the public infrastructure development, schools, health and other beneficiaries. Your entire society benefits a little and the wealthy can still lead the lifestyle they desire. During Eisenhower's presidency those marginal rates kicked in above $200,000 which is roughly equivalent to $1.7 million today and far more aggressive than Ms. Cortez's proposal. During that time prosperity was extremely high and a healthy middle class was built as a result.

Some point to current stock and job market health but they are not indicators of the problem because being employed doesn't mean you are prospering and many of these people are not market investors. Hence, you can forget these as metrics for a nation's overall health. You can also forget about the myth of trickle down economics.

If the current system were working so well we wouldn't be seeing fully employed people living out of their cars struggling to pay basic needs and foregoing health care payments while some people swim in their billions. We also wouldn't be seeing the US rank so low in the overall happiness rating (18th) for such a large industrialized nation losing to more social democratic countries like the European Nordic states, Australia and Canada.

Clearly, oligarchy works very well for the few but not so much for the majority.

Image result for eisenhower
Eisenhower

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

how times change

How times have changed.

Whereas transition was something not to even contemplate for us, here is a young trans person who felt the opposite pressure. She looks and sounds extremely passable but decided it wasn't for her despite the social media presence of young transitioners potentially inspiring her to.

We are all different and I happen to think she's rather a smart cookie as well...


indoctrination

As transgender people, organized religion hasn't really been our friend however on the other hand it has often had little to do with true spirituality. I needed to learn this over time and much of what I was taught growing up was steeped in the judgmental superstition of society instead of what some creator would demand of me.

Regardless of your belief system, you are a child of the universe and have been endowed with uniqueness and goodness of spirit. You have probably never wished anyone ill will and you have tried your best to live within the absurd coordinate system of humanity. Yet somehow belonging to the LGBT community was entirely your fault.

As I have grown older this inherent irrationality became increasingly evident to me. I knew I was a fundamentally good person and yet I was different in a way which was not of my choosing. Hence with this comprehension my self appreciation and esteem grew in proportion.

Religion for me today seems forever trapped in the misinterpretat…

let's please read carefully

This post is prompted by a recent comment I received to one of my older posts and I wanted to address it.

I used to wonder why some transgender people accepted Blanchard’s work until I think I figured out why: they may not have examined it closely enough. They would experience cross gender arousal and then accept it was Autogynephilia without properly understanding what the term meant and what the theory said: it is an invented sexual “illness” which makes people transition. In other words, it is the arousal itself which causes this desire and not a pre-existing gender identity which does not align with birth sex. Of course, Blanchard has no explanation for the origin of his proposed “illness” only that it is a form of sexual deviance.

My counter proposal? we transition despite this arousal. In other words, the transgender identity is pre-existing and the arousal is the result of the mismatching of burgeoning sexual feelings towards females and this misaligned identity; it is not per…