Here we find some of the issues that Mitt Romney was speaking of when he made the statement that nearly 50% of Americans are wealth takers rather than makers. After reading the author ends with these statements.
"It is therefore correct to reject Mr. Romney’s depiction as off-base and
misleading. Yet the fact that he didn’t present the truth is an
indication that the problem is actually worse than many of us realize."
What do you think?
I feel like the author makes these points seem much more subtle than they really are. Perhaps it's just because we are all a part of this class, but I feel like it is actually quite obvious that the equity within our political world is not in sync. Whether with bills or elections, it seems as though there is always someone with a big bank account that can influence public policy. He does make good points though and for those who do not quite understand this inequity, they should become informed.
ReplyDeleteThat is really interesting to read and looking more in depth to what Romney stated. There is no way that our system is equal by any means and that should be really obvious. There always seems to be somebody influencing some sort of policy or public official and we, as citizens, just keep going as our elected officials are making the calls for us. The wealthy have the ability, and sometimes take part, in politics because they have the money to do so. I agree with Alex too that if somehow you don't know about the inequality, they need to know.
ReplyDeleteIt has always been obvious that the system of the Unites States is not equal. We have talked about this a lot in class and discussed the many ways that it is unfair. The levels of corruption by those that have the means to do it, are alarming. They are able to influence the system in a matter of hours and change the course of things. It is important to know all these things. As citizens, it should also be our duty to do what we can to end it.
ReplyDeleteThis article does a fairly decent job depicting just how off-base Romney was with his comments about the rich being wealth takers. Even without this article I think it is very obvious that the wealth distribution between our public is very unequal. However, the one thing that Romney is correct about is that the wealthy take some advantage of certain deductions to maintain their wealth. But when considering their situation, I don't feel like any knowledgeable human would do anything different.
ReplyDeleteI really like how the article mentions that in actuality we are both wealth makers and taker. An example of a farmer who produces goods and also depends on farm subsidies is a great example. The government should be giving wealth so that more wealth can be created. Doesn't the government give tax breaks to business so they can provide more jobs? A few weeks ago, we heard the story of woman who depended on food stapes in her younger days but then went on to become a successful businesswoman who was in a high tax bracket. In my opinion, the ideal efficient system is one where the government can assist in the process of individuals growing wealth.
ReplyDeleteWhile a useful exercise in perspective, I don't feel like I learned much from this article. I am inclined to agree with the author's conclusion though, it really isn't about who is making and who is taking, everybody is taking, and everybody is dependent upon the government in one way or another. The solution to our government is surely going to be less complicated than the current system, but its reform will be no simple task.
ReplyDelete"or is the real story about lobbying and the relative power of different interest groups?"
ReplyDeleteI think this was the most interesting part of the article because it hinted at the political corruption that is probably just as bad as ever, however today it seems more prevalent because of technology and social media. I was waiting for the author to explain more about the wage gap in relation to what he deems the 'makers' and 'takers'; this never happened. I found it interesting that 7 out of the ten richest counties in the U.S. now surround Washington D.C. That can only mean that an elite group, that happens to be rather large, is running the country and not doing much in the way of creating equalizing change.