The
Future of Freedom Foundation |
03/20/10
|
|||||||||||||||||
|
June 30,
2005 I suspect its because fundamentally they dislike liberal market society. Of course, they wouldnt put it that way. They would say simply that the phenomenon known as the growing income gap is newsworthy. And why is it newsworthy? Because it says something about our society. And what might that be? Most likely that untrammeled capitalism results in social injustice, which is why government cant stand on the sidelines but rather must engage in income redistribution. (As though we have anything resembling untrammeled capitalism. Would that it were so.) Now this is all nonsense. It is nonsense at many levels. As Alan Reynolds of the Cato Institute has indefatigably shown, newspapers routinely torture income statistics from the IRS and Census Bureau to get preconceived results. For example, Reynolds explained recently that using income-tax information to measure income makes the rich look comparatively richer than they are because the bulk of the middle classs capital gains are in tax-deferred IRAs and 401(k)s they dont show up on tax returns. Hes also shown that the charge that the middle class is shrinking is true, but not in the way the newspapers (and the socialist think tanks) would have us believe. In fact, more people are rising out of the middle class than are falling out of it. The lower class is shrinking too. But those truths rarely get mentioned. If you were to take these reports seriously, youd think everyone in this society, with the exception of the few at the top, has been stagnating or getting poorer for decades. We are told this repeatedly, even as we watch multitudes of people, young and old, low-income and high-, walking down the street with ever-more-feature-rich cell phones and MP3 players. Something doesnt add up. In fact, we live in an increasingly wealthy society, which would be far wealthier were the government not taxing people so much and consuming so many resources. As Dallas Fed economist W. Michael Cox and reporter Richard Alm document (in Myths of Rich and Poor), virtually everything has been getting cheaper for years. They measure living standards by how many hours the average nonsupervisory manufacturing employee must work to buy various things and comparing this to the past. Today it costs us minutes and hours of work to afford what once took months and years. This is consistent with our everyday experience. It is true that our society has a wide range of incomes, although even poor people (a relative term) have cable color television, microwaves, washers and dryers, and cars. I dont know whether the income gap is growing, but why should anyone care? It is perfectly consistent for the gap to grow even as the lowest-income people get richer. Dont confuse comparative with absolute position. I could be richer this year than last and still have lost ground to Bill Gates. Only someone consumed with envy would worry. In a free
society, there will be and should be differences in income. Thats
because some people are better at serving consumers than others
more innovative, more ambitious, more energetic, more intelligent. Why
should they be denied their just rewards for making our lives better?
And whom would we hurt most if we deny them? Mainly ourselves.
Samuel Bostaph is head of the economics department at the University of Dallas and an academic advisor to The Future of Freedom Foundation
Anthony Gregory is a policy advisor at The Future of Freedom Foundation
James Bovard is author of The Bush Betrayal and serves as a policy advisor for The Future of Freedom Foundation
Benedict LaRosa is a historian and writer and serves as a policy advisor to The Future of Freedom Foundation
Bart Frazier is program director at The Future of Freedom Foundation.
Sheldon Richman is senior fellow at The Future of Freedom Foundation in Fairfax, Va., author of Tethered Citizens: Time to Repeal the Welfare State, and editor of The Freeman magazine.
Mr. Hornberger is founder and president of The Future of Freedom Foundation. Send him email. The Future of Freedom Foundation.
|
Solution to the Birth-Control Controversy: Deregulate the Drugstores Don't Forget Roosevelt's Attack on the Judiciary Social Security Demeans Workers Close the Bases and Cut the Spending by The Problem Is Socialism and Empire, Not Immigration Parents Are Right to Protect Their Children from the Military Compulsion: It's What's for Dinner Muddle at the Supreme Court over Medical Marijuana Boot Max Boots Recruiting Plan Trade Wars: The Empire Strikes Back Complete Archives for The Future of Freedom Foundation |
|||||||||||||||
|
Submit
Feedback
|
|
|||||||||||||||
![]() |
![]() |