Aftershock: The next economy and America's future
Uploader Comments (jacobkornbluthdotcom)
Top Comments
-
@jacobkornbluthdotcom Not only is progressive taxation NOT socialist, its greatest proponent was Adam Smith, the Father of Capitalism.
Smith understood that the wealthier members of society had the greater responsbility of taking care of a society. Wealthy citizens benefit the most from public services (roads, waterways, power grids, etc.) and they have far more cash than they need to survive. That's common sense, not socialism.
All Comments (174)
-
We have had nothing but tax cuts for the last 11 years, and unemployment has gone from 4.0% to 8.3%. The previous administration increased taxes in 1993, and unemployment fell from 7.3% to 4.0%. Can't we finally admit once and for all that tax cuts don't work, and that sometimes, higher taxes are good for the economy?
-
@KamikazeJonez No...that's socialism(.)
-
What to do Now ?????
-
Neo, you have a choice.
-
I am afraid you not going to do it again due moral declaim and the female rule you have. To make change you need man with balls with some moral compass, willing to sacrifice all. You are so PC these days that you are afraid of your own shadow.
-
your talking about reform that is borderline communism.
-
Idk, I kinda feel a Jew vibe emanating from this guy......
-
I have a LOVE-HATE view regarding Robert Reich.
One one hand, he is absolutely CORRECT & obviously understands the economic relationships within society & in the business world, etc. & he outlines it well.
HOWEVER, I saw another video earlier whereby he was touting & pushing BIG GOVERNMENT and viewed BIG GOVERNMENT as the only solution and extremely appropriate!
Clearly, we all know that Socialism FAILS (it always does... eventually). Clearly, we know that BIG Government is a HUGE PARASITE.
-
REAL TALK
Can someone please explain this? 30 years ago, the top 1% earned 9% of total (global?) income. Today, their share is 23%. In these 3 decades, the total number of workers has increased. So, effectively, more number of people are working for less money. How did that happen? Did total income rise so much over 3 decades, that even with 23% gone, there was still enough to go around? It doesn't make much sense... Wonder what people in the future will say looking back.
neeraj2608 6 months ago 5
@neeraj2608 It isn't global wealth that is distributied as you said, it is in America only. The workers in america covered it up with 3 coping mechanisms: 1) women entered the workforce -- 20% of women worked in 1970, now it is 60%, 2) people worked more (500 hours more, or a full 12 weeks) for the same salary, and 3) Americans went in to debt. Now those coping mechanisms are up, and our unequal society is being exposed. or so AFTERSHOCK says -- that's what is in the book.
jacobkornbluthdotcom 6 months ago 4