It takes money to fix these problems. Should it come from small businesspeople, like you, or from those who use their power, wealth, and influence to dramatically influence tax and fiscal policy in their favor? Tax-haveners have done so well over the last 40 years that American wealth and income have never been as inequitable as they are today, which you may have noted forces the low and middle classes to work harder and longer.
Since this builds character for those not blessed with butlers and well-paid lobbyists, that's good for America, right?
Those of us who have seen "Pretty Woman" should not forget the theme that it was built around. (Admittedly, I was paying a lot more attention to what was built around Julia.) William Lazonick, at the University of Massachusetts, Lowell, uninfluenced by Julia, states the historical and philosophical movie theme played out between Richard Gere (the Supply Side monopolist) and Ralph Bellamy (old time moral CEO):
"Up until the 1980s, CEOs were extremely reluctant to shut down factories and lay off a large number of workers. Mass layoffs were actually seen as a serious abnegation of corporate responsibility. It was understood that the company had a responsibility to it workers, and that if it failed, society at large would be on the hook for that failure."
Morally, are we losing a lot from the days when we built an up-to-date infrastructure and an envied middle class?
Do you think that those with tax havens who have been hollowing out America's middle class should pay something for the weakening they have been doing for decades? What's the price the fraction of the 1% hiding in Tax Havens should pay?
Let's roll! I mean, poll!
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
3
1
1
