http://www.gallup.com/poll/147881/Americans-Divided-Taxing-Rich-Redistribute-Wealth.aspx Check the difference between Democrats and Republicans, and women and men.
Those numbers aren't very surprising really. There are a lot of people that don't uderstand how the economy works. As for the non whites wanting redistiribution, I am shocked. I thought they had their own way of wealth distribution? Sorry, couldn't resist
What a surprise... 2/3 of the people that barely pay any federal income tax (those with an income less than 30k) think other people should pay more tax.
The Dems and Pubs are almost mirror images of each other. Men and women weren't that far off from each other, especially if you take the margin of error into consideration. It would be interesting to see the responses if they changed the wording for these questions: "As far as you are concerned, do we have too many poor people in this country, too few, or about the right amount?"
I don't believe in wealth redistrubution, but I would answer we have too many poor people. Of course, my answer would be to free the private sector to allow for job creation, so I'm not sure the answer would help to illuminate what you wanted to show.
I literally laughed out loud after reading your post, thanks. Might as well ask if we should super size that subsidy with that free big mac..History shows the distribution of wealth has been and will be a constant. Just like playing Monopoly, you start out even, and through good or bad choices or luck, you gain or lose. I dont have money, dont make big cash, I could qualify in the lower middle class, but to think we solve all the ills of the world by starting over and sharing the earned wealth of one set with the "poor" is silly.
I'd answer "too many" as well. I wasn't trying to make a point about wealth distribution in the country, just how the results would be different if the questions were framed another way. I'm a big stats buff, that's all. BTW, I don't believe in wealth redistribution either but I do believe in membership dues.
I'm of the opinion that wealth is a matter of choice. It's easier to obtain for some rather than others, but it's attainable for all. However, it does take sacrifice. You have to delay gratification when it's hardest to do so and then continue to sacrifice and work hard when others are coasting. What wealth should never be is something created by individuals and taken to be distributed by society.
Considering you don't believe in and maintaining national borders, I can't tell if you're being sarcastic or not.
I think what this shows is that people have a disconnect from reality. The Pareto principle is certainly not solely an American phenomenon. Now, if the top 20% in America have 85% of the wealth instead of the expected 80, then perhaps we're a little top heavy, but not grossly so. Just because people want something a certain way doesn't mean it's reasonable.
The disconnect comes from the difference between the "ability" to be upwardly mobile (rags-to-riches, if you will) and the "desire to work for it". Our country bends over backwards to foster and maintain the first (through things like compulsory public education, college loans/grants/scholarships, access to serve in the gov't, WIC, reduced-cost lunches, etc), while the people think that there's an obligation for the gov't to subsidize the second. I (as one who has had to use a lot of those resources) don't feel that hard work should be voluntary to move socially or economically. If you want to sit on your butt and play video games instead of taking AP classes, more power to you. If you want to get a liberal arts instead of an engineering degree or advanced occupational degree (JD, PhD, etc), America's about your right to do that. What it ISN'T about it your ability to have the same quality of life as someone who did put forth extra effort and sacrifice to delay gratification. We've turned into a nation who took the one cookie immediately instead of the 4 cookies in 10 minutes, and now think it's unfair that someone gets 4 cookies when we only got one. And personally, I have very little sympathy for those who made poor choices and yet want the rewards that come with hard work.
I defy you to show me someone in some situation who has attempted to improve their life and been stonewalled. I've personally helped dozens of people find programs to use to help them speak and read english, get low-cost nutritional food, tutoring for their kids, clothing, etc. I've worked with microlenders and helped minority kids get into the Naval Academy. And I'm one guy. But I've also been to Korea, to Africa, to Guatemala, etc and have seen what other "poor" people around the world do to survive, and it's not watching TV while waiting for an SSI check. (edit: Note, I'm not talking about the physically unable. Someone's sick grandmother obviously can't learn to be a mechanic or something.)
