They need to explain whyb income distribution in America became less equal in the years they controlled the White House and Congress.
Yes, it wasn't much better under Republicans, but it does show they are liars about helping the distribution of income.
Conservative. Idaho. Software engineer. Historian. Trying to prevent Idiocracy from becoming a documentary.
Email complaints/requests about copyright infringement to clayton @ claytoncramer.com. Reminder: the last copyright troll that bothered me went bankrupt.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Acknowledging that use of the Gini is inherently flawed, as it implicitly falls for the "fixed pie" fallacy (Bill Gates did not become the richest human by snarfing pennies from minimum-wage workers, he did so by selling something that people and businesses bought voluntarily because they thought it would improve their productivity and/or quality of life)*.
ReplyDeleteIt's pretty clear from this graph what has caused the rise in inequality when measured by household or family, because the Gini for individuals is largely unchanged. Although certain societal changes like the decline in power of unions/percent of workers in unionized jobs freeing up corporate boards to vastly increase director pay without fear of strikes for equal treatment by the workers, the ,bulk of the change is clearly because the same income that used to be combined within a household is increasingly divided between households as divorce rose (in the 60's to 90's) and never-married single-parenting rose (since then).
These societal changes were driven to some extent by changes in law, so are partially attributable to the party "in charge" for changes in divorce law and other unintended incentives towards household dissolution. But I don't think the people pushing for "solutions" to income inequality really want to consider making divorce more difficult to obtain or restoring the approbrium of single-parenting in situations other than being widowed.
*more fool them