Three Cheers for Income Inequality | Hoover Institution

This piece is just too important to miss. It really cuts through much of the nonsense that we hear from useless hard left traditional media such as the New York Times. But the bottom line is; do we want to have a robust economy that rewards hard work and success or do we want a nation driven from a central planning platform in Washington that focuses on equality of outcomes? In the end, continuous envy of success will only destroy the nation and punitive taxes will ensure that the destruction will be complete and thorough....

The United States is now in the midst of killing the goose that lays the golden eggs. That current strategy is failing in the face of economic stagnation, even with no increase in tax rates. It will quickly crumble if tax increases are used to feed the current coalition of unions and farmers who will receive much of the revenue, while the employment prospects of ordinary people languish for want of the major capital investments that often depend on the wealth of the privileged one percent of the population.

A nation cannot survive if it BOTH wants the wealth creators to create jobs/national wealth and pay punitive taxes. There two are mutually exclusive and cannot be achieved.

And what about taxes the seem to be the permanent bee in the liberals bonnet? It is very difficult to discern if punitive taxes on the wealthy through heavily progressive tax rates may or may not be effective at achieving the goals of the nation. So then why do Democrats and liberals insist on them? Because it has nothing to do with economics or determining optimal levels of taxation but everything to do with faith in socialism that has created a core need to lead vicious attacks on those that work, create and save. Higher taxes is the blue blood that flows thorough the veins of modern liberalism and so what about these taxes? I think that there is absolutely no reasonable argument that the level of progressivity in the tax code is optimal other than baseless desires by Democrats to make it even more progressive....

But what about the flat tax? Frank and others are right to note that a return to the flat tax will result in an enormous redistribution of income to the top one percent from everyone else. But why assume that the current level of progressivity sets the legitimate baseline, especially in light of the current anemic levels of economic growth? What theory justifies progressive taxation in the first place? The current system presupposes that this nation can continue to fund the aspirations of 99 percent out of the wealth of the one percent. That will prove to be unsustainable. A return to a flatter tax (ideally a flat) tax will have just the short-term consequences that Frank fears. It will undo today’s massively redistributivist policies. But it will also go a long way toward unleashing growth in our heavily regulated and taxed economy.

Clearly, socialism doesn't and didn't work. It didn't work in Russia, 1960's China, North Korea, North Vietnam, et al, and the loss of liberty that comes in such environments; the destruction of people, families and society should not to be overlooked either.

Rational people have to fight against these urges to legally steal from others under the hard left guise of "justice" through a national tax code where people have no choice but to pay or stop working. its self destructive and frankly stupid, so why are we even considering such lunacy?

Three Cheers for Income Inequality | Hoover Institution