http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/08/us/politics/economic-plan-is-a-quandary-for-hillary-clintons-campaign.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&module=first-column-region®ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0
The most dilemma Mrs. Clinton is facing during her campaign is how to solve the income inequality problem without punishing the rich too much. Several principles she is expected to implement are to include standard Democratic initiatives like raising the minimum wage, investing in infrastructure, closing corporate tax loophole and cutting taxes for the middle class. There are also new ideas, such as providing incentives to corporations to increase profit-sharing with employees and changing labor laws to give workers more collective bargaining power. The objective is to bring equal opportunity back to America, the land of American dream. However, i do not agree in giving the poor and middle class more money, instead the government could provide the population with education in finance management. If people don't know how to manage their money, the more money they have, the deeper debt they would acquire.
7 comments:
I agree with offering more education than more money. Offering higher education to all is the highest goal, but for now we can't even create a public primary school system that equally reaches everyone.
You are right in saying that redistributing money will not solve the problem of income equality, and instead correct education should be provided. However, the funding for this education will also have to come from tax payer dollars initially. But in the long run, giving equal skill sets to people will hopefully ensure equal opportunity to all.
Quite frankly, I'm just happy to see the issue of income inequality being discussed by potential future government leaders. A recent article by Forbes states that the gap in the wealth that different American households have accumulated is more extreme than at any time since the Great Depression. Not only is rising inequality bad for business, it's bad for society too.
Inequality is an issue that will always be discussed by future leaders becasue it’s an important issue. Inequality is something really hard to prevent, rich always keep getting richer and it’s really hard to take their hard earned money without upsetting them. While income distribution is good, I am all for Obama’s two years free of community college program. This is a great start.
Ibs, I think you raised a valid argument with the free community college initiative proposed by President Obama. I do not know if lessons in financial management will be enough to address this issue. Many students at OWU make haphazard financial decisions, and these students have the benefit of higher education.
Additionally, there is continual talk of closing corporate loopholes, but there has been little action in addressing this issue. The US has the highest marginal corporate tax rate in the world. There has to be a way to address this issue, while continuing to allow for the US to be the greatest nation in the world to operate a business.
I agree with you that offering education is better than simply offering money to the poor. However, I don't think the poor will change their living style after taking the money management class, it is more reasonable to give their next generation a good education. Education revolution cannot finish in the short run, I do agree with the other policies to decrease inequality by giving people equal opportunities.
Speaking specifically to the points about the free community college initiative as proposed by the President, my first observation is that the proposal is dead in the medium term. The GOP, who would naturally oppose such a move, aren't expected to lose control of both houses until at least 2022.
Secondly, I worry that the proposal will increase the burden on the government and thus the taxpayer for tertiary education for some. The nation will have to judge if that is in its best interests at the ballot box. Aside from the obvious point, my second point is that, apart from potentially raising the national debt at a time where we could do without it, this might actually devalue the degrees obtained at community colleges, as it is conceivable that, in response to skyrocketing demand in light of a lowered price for community college, many more students will obtain Associates or other degrees from community colleges, creating a glut in the labor market of community college degree recipients, effectively making the degree worth less to employers.
Post a Comment