2009Oct16 How About America?
2009Oct16 How About America?
This week’s poll results examine what respondents are thinking about America. The poll was not scientific and was driven by radio listeners of the syndicated Don Creech Radio Show and subscribers to its “Week in Review” email. Listen or subscribe at www.DonCreech.com.
Do all people in our country have the same opportunities to fulfill their potential?
Sixty percent of respondents answered in the affirmative. This is an issue of freedom. It is true that we have citizens who live in very poor parts of cities and in remote villages in various mountain ranges and in the wide open spaces in our country. Unlike countries with strong class or caste social systems, our citizens can choose to pack their belongings, meager as they may be, and start a new life in another part of our country. There are no restrictions to moving and starting over. That is the freedom and liberty that was sought by our founding fathers. It exists nowhere else on earth in a greater degree that right here in the US of A. This does not mean that everyone will fulfill their potential. Not everyone chooses to try.
Is the gap between the rich and the poor getting larger or smaller?
Especially on the global front, the income gap is enlarging and fifty three percent of respondents correctly identified this or guessed well. It is hard for many to believe this is good. If no one had the opportunity to get richer, all would remain poor. It is the continual opportunity to increase one’s productivity that creates opportunity for the less advantaged.
Do senior executives earn too much each year in salaries and bonuses?
This was split with two thirds of respondents answering in the affirmative. This begs the question of what limits does society want to place on a person’s motivation, industriousness and creativity? If senior executives are paid too much, what limits do you place on actors, musicians, newscasters and sports stars? Once the government begins to implement wage control, at what level is it likely to stop. If not with the CEOs, then is it the VPs, the regional managers, the store manager, clerk or stockroom attendant? What is the consequence to society at large and revenues to all levels of government when you penalize individual efforts and dedication to apply one’s skills and talents? Freedom repressed is a reduction in general welfare, income, standard of living, health and life expectancy. Global evidence has become incontrovertible for freedom to improve all walks of life – even the poor among us.
"The number of poor people who can't afford food for their children is a lot smaller than it used to be -- thanks to capitalism. Capitalism didn't create malnutrition, it reduced it. The globalization of capitalism from 1950 to the present has increased annual average income in the world to $7,000 from $2,000. Contrary to popular legend, poor countries grew at about the same rate as the rich ones. This growth gave us the greatest mass exit from poverty in world history.”
Should the government set pay caps for heads of companies?
The majority of respondents in the previous question believe executive compensation is too high. However, here a larger percentage, 73% believe the government should not be involved in setting pay caps. Somehow this seems to be contradictory. Perhaps it is jealousy. Perhaps it is a suppressed Puritanical belief that “no one needs that much money.” Here the underlying assumption of freedom is recognized but denied in the previous case.
Does the income tax structure correctly tax those who earn the highest incomes?
Now we come to another contradictory position. If CEOs earn too much but the government should not interfere, why then do 73% of respondents believe the high income earners are not properly taxed? Is it because they should be taxed more or less?
We have a “progressive” income tax structure which means the more you earn the heavier your tax burden.
The top 5% of wage earners pay approximately 54% of all federal income taxes. The top 10% are paying roughly two thirds of all federal income taxes. What most people are not aware of is that the top 50% of wage earners are paying more than 95% of all federal income taxes!
The more productive and profitable you are, the greater the tax incentive is to discontinue your economic endeavors.
Does the income tax structure correctly tax those who earn the lowest incomes?
Two thirds of respondents do not believe the lower income earners are fairly taxed. Since the lowest levels of earners in the US actually receive IRS rebates when they did not pay any tax at all, we can argue, as Steve Forbes campaigned a few years ago, for a flat tax so all citizens “have some skin in the game.” If you pay nothing, your game becomes one of surviving by finding as many handouts as possible from as many agencies as possible. That does not develop a healthy society, much less an individual.
The role that politicians play in managing the economy is…?
The 73% number kept popping up in this week’s questions and did again here in the category of politicians role in the economy being large. The current administration is not through trying to expand the government’s control of our lives which is a surrender of our freedom and liberty to make decisions for ourselves. Twenty percent voted for the government to maintain the current level of involvement. Only 6% voted for our politicians to do more.
Is Globalization having a positive or negative effect on the country?
Respondents were fairly evenly split on this issue. Fifty three percent believe globalization has negatively affected our country. It is difficult to look at jobs that have moved overseas and not reach that conclusion. However, globalization has improved our standard of living remarkably by keeping inflation at bay. It has, also, created wealth in poorer countries, improving their standards of living and increasing their satisfaction with staying at home instead of trying to immigrate into the US.
What about Mexico and Central America, you may ask? Most of the Hispanics who have crossed our border have been here as migrant workers, not immigrants. They have come here for jobs, not to become US citizens. As jobs have disappeared in the southwest, many migrants have been returning to their homes.
"In a poor country like ours, the alternative to low-paid jobs isn't well-paid ones; it's no jobs at all." -- Jesús Reyes-Heroles, Mexico's Ambassador to the USA.
When we do not have jobs for migrants, there is no reason to come or stay in the United States.
|
