On the distribution of wealth/income

[Ted King]

If you accept that wealth and income are accumulating in fewer hands and much of that accumulation is not merited, then there is the issue of what to do about it. The primary way we have dealt with the regulated free marker system distributing too much wealth/income not based on merit has been by taxing the wealthiest/highest incomes at a greater rate and providing tax breaks and government assistance to lower income people. I don't think that model is sustainable as a higher proportion of people slip into needing that assistance. For people who are capable of working, they should be able to provide for the basic welfare of themselves and their families without government assistance. Having more and more people dependent on government aid rather than having their own labor provide for them is bad social policy.

The problem is (making the assumptions above), how do we "jigger" the regulated free market economic system so that people who are capable of work actually have jobs available and get paid a wage where they don't need government assistance instead of redistribution by taxation?


- - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Totally a side note: I have the outline of a bit of a strange argument for the premise that the regulated free market system does not distribute wealth/income sufficiently based on merit - and it starts with considering entropy. I could lay it out if someone wants to challenge the assumption that wealth/income are accumulating in fewer hands with much of it not being merited.