In U.S., 67% Dissatisfied With Income, Wealth Distribution


#1

[LEFT]WASHINGTON, D.C. – Two out of three Americans are dissatisfied with the way income and wealth are currently distributed in the U.S. This includes three-fourths of Democrats and 54% of Republicans.
[/LEFT]

[LEFT]
President Barack Obama spoke about income disparities in a Dec. 4, 2013, speech, saying he wanted to prioritize lowering income disparity and increasing opportunities, particularly for the poor, during the rest of his second term. He most likely will return to that topic in his State of the Union speech at the end of the month. Gallup’s Jan. 5-8 Mood of the Nation survey included a question asking Americans how satisfied they are with income and wealth distribution in the U.S. Few, 7%, report that they are “very satisfied” with the distribution, while 39% of Americans say they are “very dissatisfied.”

Attitudes about the distribution of income and wealth are highly related to partisanship. Republicans, at 45% very or somewhat satisfied, express the highest satisfaction with the current wealth disparity in the U.S. Democrats are much less satisfied, at 24%, with independents closer in satisfaction to Democrats, at 28%. Furthermore, almost half (43%) of Democrats and independents express strong dissatisfaction with the current state of wealth and income distribution.
[/LEFT]
gallup.com/poll/166904/dissatisfied-income-wealth-distribution.aspx


#2

I wonder how many people actually know that wealth is not “distributed” in a free market economy? Has the rise of the entitlement society coupled with the dumbing down of our country’s history created a sense that it is the government’s job to “distribute” the wealth? As if the economy is a finite pie and government the arbiter of who gets what?

Ishii


#3

Dana Perino was talking about this today, and she noted the correlation between traditional marriage and higher earnings.

But, I don’t think we’ll see the democrats pushing for that anytime soon. :shrug:


#4

Except of course, that we don’t have a free market economy. For example, regulations increase many people’s incomes. Think of medical licensing laws that restrict who can practice medicine which keep out competition and raise incomes of physicians. Think about immigration restrictions that keep skilled workers out of the US and keep up wages for domestic workers. Or think of all the hoops that one has to go through in most states to become a licensed electrician. These work to the advantage of licensed electricians.

So it would seem that income distribution is something legitimate to be concerned about.


#5

You are correct, the US is anything but a free market economy!


#6

I would think that “human nature” being as it is, that the percentage should be more like 99% being dissatisfied. :confused:

I wish that I made more. :stuck_out_tongue:


#7

That is why I went to college. And when I get satisfied with my share of the wealth distribution then I will retire.


#8

Well said!:thumbsup:


#9

Well, there is this commandment which states “Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor’s goods.”


#10

As anybody who has read my posts can attest, I am “slightly” conservative (though I gave up membership in the GOP a while ago because they’ve become too left wing for my tastes)

I would absolutely answer that question that I am very dissatisfied with the way wealth is distributed in this country.

I don’t think that government should forcibly redistribute wealth. Therefore, I am utterly -]dissatisfied/-] disgusted with how wealth is distributed.

I am also dissatisfied with Americans’ opportunity to get ahead. I think that out-of-control government regulation and punitive taxes make it virtually impossible to rise out of the middle class.

Since Gallup only releases extracts of their polls and not the full content, I don’t know if diagnostic questions were asked to further define “how” a person was dissatisfied with how income was distributed or to further define “why” people were dissatisfied with the ability to get ahead.


#11

That’s exactly what came to my mind. :smiley:


#12

I completely agree with this. I think we do have an obligation to make sure the truly needy, i.e. the disabled, are taken care of, but other than that, wealth distribution is not an option we should even be entertaining.


#13

I would distinguish between the ideology that the economy is a finite pie to be carved up by enlightened individuals in government, and the idea that our medical professions need some kind of oversight in terms of who gets licensed. I was referring to the former - and particularly re-distributive policies. However, I realize that there are other ways that government policies can influence the incomes of people. Environmental regulations are another example.

Ishii


#14

Satisfied with wealth distribution? LOL the wording is clearly written by liberals.

I’m dissatisfied at the Feds limiting wealth distribution to heirs by way of the death tax, but I doubt that’s what they are referring to.


#15

You are, of course, aware that wealth is “distributed” in any kind of economy, regardless of whether government or any other agency actively mediates this?

Look at the statistics showing who has what: that is the distribution of wealth (n).


#16

This is exactly right. Wealth is not distributed it is earned. The govt cannot create wealth. They can distribute money and through regulations and confiscations. Monetary policies affect the value of money. The only way to create wealth is to expand the economic pie. Money does not equal wealth.


#17

But of course, those are both liberal ideas. If I want to go to a nurse practitioner for a particular treatment and the np is willing to treat me, what business is it for the government to stop the transaction? And of course, when the AMA lobbies the government to restrict who can provide healthcare, it skews the distribution of income in the wrong direction.

I was referring to the former - and particularly re-distributive policies.

But of course, we cannot tell from this data what fraction holds these views. Also, people in general have no problem with re-distributive policies when it benefits them. Medicare part D was clearly redistributive, but most seniors have no problem with that since they are on the receiving end of the redistribution.

However, I realize that there are other ways that government policies can influence the incomes of people. Environmental regulations are another example.

Ishii

When people are on the receiving end of government redistribution it is pretty easy for them to rationalize that they are just getting what they are entitled to.


#18

Government policies can facilitate the production of wealth with policies such as a court system that protects property rights and enforces contracts. So while the government doesn’t directly create wealth, it has an important role to play otherwise Somalia would be the richest nation on earth.

Also wealth is not always earned. People who own banks today have more wealth than they deserve because the government bailed them out. Many farmers have more wealth than they deserve because the government has policies that keep food prices high. In a pure capitalist system wealth my be purely earned, but we are not a pure capitalist system.

They can distribute money and through regulations and confiscations. Monetary policies affect the value of money. The only way to create wealth is to expand the economic pie. Money does not equal wealth.

If money doesn’t equal wealth then would you mind sending me all your money? You would be no poorer for it if you are correct.


#19

No offense intended, but this poll shows how spoiled rotten the American people are. They are voting to choke the golden goose. Many people ALREADY are taxed at all government levels beyond 60% of their income. Then comes sales and excise taxes, building permit fees and everything else.
Where in the world did people get the notion that they are ENTITLED to a “distribution” of someone else’s earnings? In my world, that is called theft. Is it any wonder that the Fed believes that they must print $1T each year based upon NOTHING to keep our economy sputtering along? Is it any wonder that America’s, indeed the world’s economy is nearing collapse?
People of the world have bought the criminal, socialist notion that government officials, some of whom are among the most corrupt people on earth, can right injustices by robbing Peter to pay Paul. All they are doing is buying votes to keep themselves entrenched in power with cushy jobs which overpay them and their friends far more than they could ever make in our dwindling private sector.
I had always thought that America was about freedom, and sovereignty of each individual; I was wrong. :cool: Rob


#20

[quote=stinkcat_14;11623813
]


I would mind sending you all my money and I remain measuring my wealth in more ways than in money. It is not for you to tell me that I would be no poorer for giving you my money because I am the one who measures that; not the government. The Obama mentality that you are trying to promote might persuade someone to give you all their money, but as P. T. Barnum said, “There is a sucker born every minute”! Propaganda pie eaters and Kool Aid drinkers are counting on Obama to “redistribute” (stick-up) the gold.
Its “gimmmeee, gimmmee, gimmmeee”
[/quote]


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.