by the Left Coast Rebel
One of the most destructive and ludicrous beliefs of movement leftists is the destructive and ludicrous obsession (and feverish cry to, just do something, government!) over "unfair income inequality", ie. "not enough income redistribution. Far-left crazies, academics and lamestream media socialist mouthpieces simply won't be happy until those who earn a "higher" income than most are chopped down to whatever constitutes a "fair" income to leftist central planners (an ever-floating and non-adjusted for inflation theme).
On queue, Soros mouthpiece, Think Progress, used the situation in Egypt to shout from the rooftops that "income inequality" is much, much, worse in the United States than it is in Egypt. Think Progress points to Tunisia and Yemen as better examples of "fairer" income redistribution than the United States, too.
Read the best example (today) of the gaping chasm of the irreconcilable divide between us and the left here.
Updated: Reader Rick Caird hat-tipped me on several thing that easily disprove the "income inequality" fallacy. First, he dropped a link to a chart from Zero Hedge that show that those in lower income tiers -- after government goodies, "credits", child assistance, etc. -- actually end up better off than their middle class counterparts (a Mississippi family is used for this example):
Get it? The family making $15,000 actually received the most economic benefit in the chart above and fulfilled the unintended consequence of government assistance redistribution and/or handout programs. The welfare state, in many cases, actually discourages wealth creation (even by "normal" income standards) and creates a situation, like today, in which poverty pays more than being a working stiff.
Second, Rick Caird hat-tipped me on a post over at the Blog Prof that expands on this theme.
Like everything else from the collectivist left, the "income inequality" canard is a big fat lie.