An economics, investment, trading and policy blog with a focus on Modern Monetary Theory (MMT). We seek the truth, avoid the mainstream and are virulently anti-neoliberalism.
Pages
▼
Pages
▼
Monday, October 26, 2015
David F. Ruccio — What’s class got to do with it?
Income inequality in the US — the figures. No worries. It's "just deserts."
Occasional Links & Commentary What’s class got to do with it? David F. Ruccio | Professor of Economics, University of Notre Dame
I hope that is sarcasm, Tom and you aren't going over to the dark-side. All that exposure to Russian media and oligarchs might be getting to you!
Even the median of $28,851.21 a year would be difficult to raise a family on as a single income earner. I'm not sure of the rationale, but I think the orthodox economic paradigm views subsidy and non-cash compensation as less distorting to "Labor Markets" to have low wages but government tax credits, transfer payments for food & housing, and health care subsidies rather than cash payments because poor people were not responsible or trustworthy enough to spend the money on housing and food, especially when children are involved and maybe parents have mental, drug, and other problems. If you add those payments into the totals, income inequality probably looks less severe but still inexcusable.
I hope that is sarcasm, Tom and you aren't going over to the dark-side. All that exposure to Russian media and oligarchs might be getting to you!
ReplyDeleteEven the median of $28,851.21 a year would be difficult to raise a family on as a single income earner. I'm not sure of the rationale, but I think the orthodox economic paradigm views subsidy and non-cash compensation as less distorting to "Labor Markets" to have low wages but government tax credits, transfer payments for food & housing, and health care subsidies rather than cash payments because poor people were not responsible or trustworthy enough to spend the money on housing and food, especially when children are involved and maybe parents have mental, drug, and other problems. If you add those payments into the totals, income inequality probably looks less severe but still inexcusable.
Public schools are an indirect subsidy for the poor as well since rich people generally don't let their kids go anywhere near public schools.
ReplyDeletehope that is sarcasm, Tom and you aren't going over to the dark-side.
ReplyDeleteSnark, of course. I thought the quotes around just deserts indicated that.