The rich are getting richer and the
poor are getting poorer, and that's before this year's tax bill.
While the Washington debate has focused
on the size of tax breaks and who will get them, the tax overhaul
takes place against a background of major growth in the gap in family
assets between those at the top and everybody else. It will make it
the difference even greater.
Do people care about the wealth and
income spread? It may become a problem for society when those at the
low end simply cannot meet their basic expenses as government faces
the need to cut spending.
In 1963, the wealthiest had six times
the assets of middle-income families, according to Urban Institute
statistics. By 2016, they had 12 times as much as middle-income
families. Meanwhile, the poorest went from having assets of about
$1,000 to bearing debt of $1,000.
The biggest cause for the gap is the
meteoric increase in the wealth of the top 10 percent. In the past
20 years, their wealth has taken off, leaving others behind.
With higher incomes, people can save
more and make investments that increase their wealth. There’s
obvious momentum that shows that having some money is the best basis
for making more money.
What’s the reason for the widening
gap? Wealthier people have higher incomes. And they enjoy the
effect of government programs to stimulate growth in family wealth
far more than the rest of the population.
In an economy with high employment,
concerns now focus on the lack of progress in improving family
income. The average expected tax cut of about two percent will do
little to solve that problem. In fact, the gap is likely to grow
thanks to bigger breaks for the wealthy.
Technology and imports have undermined
pay raises for people with less skilled jobs. The value of their
labor in the market cannot grow when they must compete with
production by robots or low-income foreign workers.
To see their incomes increase, workers
will need training for more advanced jobs. The looming problem is
that the number of jobs based on technology may be less than the
number of jobs performed by lower skilled workers. That may help
explain why so many people have dropped out of the work force.
Not all people are economically equal.
The lifetime income of white men is $2.7 million compared with $1.5
million for African American men. Men of either group do better than
women of any group.
Another reason why most families have
relatively little wealth is the emphasis on consumer spending as the
chief driver of the American economy. High retail spending means
little income is left for savings. Automatic savings plans have been
consistently opposed by retail business.
The main sources of family wealth are
home ownership and retirement funds. Tax laws are designed to
support the growth of both of these assets, but the benefits flow
mostly to higher income families.
Before the new tax bill, the federal
government spent about $400 billion a year to help people boost their
wealth, according to the Urban Institute. Almost half of these tax
breaks goes to supporting employer-sponsored retirement plans, which
mostly benefit the wealthiest 20 percent.
Next is the tax write-off for mortgage
interest and an even larger share goes to the wealthy few. The tax
break is designed to encourage home ownership, but Canada, without
such a benefit, has a higher share of families that own homes. The
U.S. system serves mainly to encourage buying bigger homes.
The ability of many people to survive
through their retirement results from federal government programs
like Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. These programs
essentially replace what would ideally be income from personal
savings.
Because these so-called “entitlements”
form a major part of the federal budget, and House Speaker Ryan will
propose next year to reduce them. Employers are unlikely to step in
to fill the gap. What will happen to those dependent on them for
their economic survival?
In the end, the only solution to avoid
an economic crisis may be targeted tax increases. The ceiling on the
mortgage interest write-off could be lowered further and the proceeds
used to assist first-home buyers.
Social Security and Medicare benefits
might be taxed more at top income levels. The wealthy are not
heavily dependent on these programs, but a higher tax on their
payments could be used to protect people who need them to survive.
The federal government now leans toward promoting the growth of
wealth for the already wealthy. At least, it should do the same for
everybody else.
No comments:
Post a Comment