Wealth Distribution in the USA

If each of the 5 income quintiles held exactly the same amount of wealth through force...aka taxation, how do you think the standard of living would fare through time. I'm not talking about immediately after the wealth was removed from the upper brackets; I'm talking about after several decades of such removal.

I was thinking about a reduction in the standard of living. But hasn't iceland always had the same distribution of wealth?

Are you sure it isn't the other way around? Doesn't the disparity between richest and poorest become less when the standard of living goes up? Can you show me a time in american history when the disparity between rich and poor was achieved through taxation and resulted in an improved standard of living?

There are two ways that money goes into the economy. One is through spending on products and services and the other is through investments in those who provide products and services. I venture that most government expenditures go into the economy via the first route. I also venture that business profits go into the economy via the second route. Even those profits that go into offshore tax shelters go into some countries economy via the second route. Everyone here seems to agree that this is a global economy, so helping another countries economy also helps ours.The opinion of some here seems to be that the best way to help the economy is by pumping money into it via the first route and preferably via the government. If this is true, why isn't giving everyone a guaranteed annual income of 40,000 dollars adjusted annually for inflation the best way to help the economy?

Do you agree with it?

deletedEdited by foreveryoung, : No reason given.

So, you do agree with a minimum annual income. You have already stated that money spent on good and services is the way to help the economy and the best source of that money is through government expenditure. If you really want to help the economy why not provide everyone with money to be able to own a 3 bedroom home in a nice neighborhood and 2 cars that are never more than 2 years old?I see your provisos that should be done before everyone is given free cash though. For arguments sake, lets let those be done as well.

But, if you don't pay your taxes, you go to jail. This may not be at the point of a gun but that is metaphor anyway.

I did read what you wrote. What you intended to communicate and what was actually understood are two different things. My understanding from what you wrote is that spending is what stimulates an economy and that corporate profits siphon off money and direct it away from the economy in an unproductive manner. I realize that you didn't say government but that is the source of spending if you don't want to include evil corporations or the evil monied class.