FORUMS‎ > ‎

中产阶级是如何被消灭的




http://www.cinfoshare.org/re/lenders/leader-funding-inc


01/16/2019

中产阶级是如何被消灭的

By Layin

1、加税—— 不解释。

2、通货膨胀——不解释。

3、给你机会,鼓励你投资。让你觉得遍地黄金,赚钱很容易,然后掉坑里。

4、金融危机,隔10几年来一回割一茬子茁壮的韭菜。

5、鼓励信用消费,用明天的钱办今天的事,把你变成一个口袋里连1000美金都拿不出来的穷人。

这下子,你就彻底安分了,因为你有危机感,只能踏踏实实地干活挣工资还债,一点梦想都不敢再有了。

西方先用这种方法保持了社会的稳定。

中国正在积极效仿。 






    
   
Offering serious and challenging mathematics to intellectually gifted students


http://www.cinfoshare.org/education/areteem-institute


01/16/2019

America’s Middle Class Is Slowly Being ‘Wiped Out’

By Gary Reber


On July 23, 2018, Larry Getlen writes in The New York Post:

It’s 30% more expensive to be middle class than it was 20 years ago, according to a new book.

Getty Images

America’s middle class is being wiped out by the cost of living far outpacing salaries, says Alissa Quart, author of ‘Squeezed: Why Our Families Can’t Afford America.’
After spending his days teaching AP American history and economics at the public Live Oak High School in San Jose, Calif., Matt Barry drives for Uber.

Barry’s wife, Nicole, teaches as well — they each earn $69,000, a combined salary that not long ago was enough to afford a comfortable family life. But due to the astronomical costs in his area, including real estate — a 1,500-square-foot “starter home” costs $680,000 — driving for Uber was a necessity.

“Teachers are killing themselves,” Barry says in Alissa Quart’s new book, “Squeezed: Why Our Families Can’t Afford America” (Ecco), out Tuesday. “I shouldn’t be having to drive Uber at eight o’clock at night on a weekday. I just shut down from the mental toll: grading papers between rides, thinking of what I could be doing instead of driving — like creating a curriculum.”

“Teachers are killing themselves. I shouldn’t be having to drive Uber at eight o’clock at night on a weekday.”

Matt Barry, teacher and Uber driver

In her book, author Quart lays out how America’s middle class is being wiped out by the cost of living far outpacing salaries while a slew of traditionally secure professions — like teaching — can no longer guarantee a stable enough income to clothe and feed a family.


http://www.cinfoshare.org/education/aplus-learning-center-tutoring-group-advisory-services

APLUS教学中心 | 一对一辅导服务中心 | 申请咨询顾问中心



http://www.cinfoshare.org/education/pinnacle-academy-after-school-program


“Middle-class life is now 30% more expensive than it was 20 years ago,” Quart writes, citing the costs of housing, education, health care and child care in particular. “In some cases the cost of daily life over the last 20 years has doubled.”

In one of her book’s many striking findings, Quart writes that according to a Pew study, “Before the 2008 crash, only one-quarter of Americans viewed themselves as lower class or lower-middle class. No longer. After the recession of 2008 …a full 40% of Americans viewed themselves as being at the bottom of the pyramid.”

One of the book’s main messages, therefore, is that people finding it impossible to make ends meet shouldn’t blame themselves. It’s the system, she says, that’s broken.

“The main problem is a basic lack of a 21st century safety net for families,” Quart tells The Post, offering the cost of day care as just one example.

“In Montreal,” where day care is government subsidized, it costs “$7 to $20 a day. That makes a huge difference for families.” Figured annually for 50 weeks a year, five days a week, people in Montreal pay $1,750 to $5,000 per year on child care.

By comparison, Quart says that here, “many of the families I spoke to, who were ostensibly middle class, were spending around 20% to 30% of their income on day care.” Annual averages in the US range from “$10,468 for a center-based child-care program to $28,905 for a nanny.” According to the Economic Policy Institute, the annual average cost of infant care in New York state is $14,144. The average New York family with just one child pays 21.2% of their income on child care. For two kids, that rises to 38.7%.


http://www.cinfoshare.org/re/lenders/sunny-lending-llc


For teachers with children, the problem is compounded by a decrease in salaries, benefits and general job security. The situation is equally dire for teachers of grade school, high school or college.

“These days, professors may be more likely than their students to be living in basement apartments and subsisting on ramen and Tabasco,” she writes.

At the professorial level, more colleges than ever, driven by bloated administrative bureaucracies, are relying on adjunct professors who receive low wages and no benefits. In the book, Quart cites one survey that found that 62% of adjunct professors earn less than $20,000 a year from teaching.

“Professors may be more likely than their students to be living in basement apartments and subsisting on ramen and Tabasco.”

Alissa Quart

“A lot of things happened in [academia]. It became much more administrative,” says Quart, noting that tenured professor positions have been eliminated through attrition as more non-tenure track professors, such as adjuncts, were hired instead.

She writes that according to the Department of Education, “college and university administrative positions grew by 60% between 1993 and 2009 — 10 times the rate of growth of tenured faculty positions.”

By contrast, in 1975, Quart writes, “full-time tenure-stream professors were 45.1% of America’s professoriate. As of 2011, they are only 24.1%: Only one professor in six (16.7%) actually has tenure.”

“Something like 40% of teachers in American colleges and universities are adjuncts, which is insane,” Quart adds. “Middle-class parents are spending all their savings to pay for colleges where [their children are] going to be taught by people making $3,000 a class [per semester]. It’s going to change the quality of education, because people are teaching four classes a semester for no money.”

Quart profiled several struggling adjuncts in the book. Justin Thomas taught a total of four to six classes a semester at two colleges in Illinois. The first paid him $3,100 per class; the second, a paltry $1,675. Quart writes that “his paychecks arrived a month after each semester began, and during those four weeks it was macaroni and cheese and baked potatoes every night for his two daughters.”

Brianne Bolin, 35 years old with a disabled 8-year-old boy, taught four classes a year at Columbia College in Chicago for a grand total of $4,350 per class, per semester, never making more than $24,000 a year from teaching. At the time of the book’s writing, she shopped at Goodwill exclusively and relied on Medicaid and food stamps to feed her son.

Bolin began teaching at Westwood College in Chicago at age 26, switching to Columbia after one semester. She got pregnant at 28, then took two years off to care for her son.

When she returned to work, she got a rude awakening about how the realities of teaching had changed.

“Her boss warned her she’d never get a permanent job, [telling her], ‘Academia just isn’t a career choice anymore,’ ” Quart writes.

Bolin quit teaching in 2016 and is now studying to become a speech pathologist. But the situation for professors has become so dire that before she left, she and two others founded PrecariCorps, a “nonprofit devoted to helping impoverished professors.”

So far, the “scrappy and fledgling” charity has “received over 100 donations and 50 requests for funding” and dispersed over $10,000 to professors in need.

If a charity for professors strikes you as sad, there is also a charity for members of another down and out profession, one that was once synonymous with high status and massive salaries — lawyers.

Leave Law Behind is an organization that helps lawyers exit the profession, declaring on its website that “there is an easier, less painful, less stressful and lucrative way to make money.” The organization’s founder, a former lawyer named Casey Berman, told Quart that “he saw his mission as ‘motivating’ former lawyers who are either broke or deeply frustrated, or both.”

In the book, Quart illustrates how lawyers are weighed down with massive debt while making a fraction of what they used to before the Great Recession — if they’re lucky enough to find a job at all.

“After the 2008 recession, law firms and corporations retained fewer lawyers,” she writes, noting that lawyers in some states have it worse than others.

“In Alaska, 56.7% of those with a law degree were not working as lawyers. In Tennessee, only 53.6% of degree holders were working as lawyers; in Missouri it’s 50.8%, and in Maryland it’s 50.3% …there are excess attorneys in all but three states.” (For the record, those states are Rhode Island, North Dakota and Delaware.)

As technology continues to advance, it will soon swallow the few entry-level jobs that are left, even as college debt continues to increase.

But those lucky enough to have a job in the field might find themselves needing to drive for Uber as well, since “lawyers may be making one-quarter of what they were making before 2008.”

The problem has been exacerbated by the automation of the review of legal documents, a task once accomplished by young lawyers. Programs like Viewpoint and Logikcull handle the organization, coding, retrieval and search of massive amounts of evidentiary documents, easily processing a slew of paperwork in ways that used to be done by people by hand. As a result, opportunities at the bottom of the profession have shrunk, taking pay levels down with them.

It’s the rare young lawyer who can get one of the few jobs remaining for this task, and they “are typically now earning just $17 to $20 an hour, while shouldering upward of $200,000 in student debt.”

As technology continues to advance, it will soon swallow the few entry-level jobs that are left, even as college debt continues to increase, Quart writes.

“The average law student’s debt was about $140,000 in 2012 — a 59% increase over 2004.”

While making ends meet is tougher than ever for teachers and lawyers, it’s even harder for those whose jobs have never been particularly secure.

Women in care professions, such as nannies, or even just professional women who become pregnant face similar standard-of-living obstacles, plus additional losses due to discrimination, Quart writes.

In the book, Quart notes that women’s salaries go down 7% for each child they bear and that cases of discrimination against women who become pregnant are on a massive upswing.

“In 2016,” she writes, “a report published by the Center for WorkLife Law found that so-called family-responsibilities discrimination cases had risen 269% over the last decade, even though the number of federal employee discrimination cases as a whole had decreased.”

This, Quart says, is due to a traditional lack of respect for care givers.

“There’s a theory called Prisoner of Love, where people who do care work will accept lower wages supposedly because they love the people they’re being paid to care for. So they’re weakened by that, and they’re less part of a marketplace.”

As if these problems aren’t worrisome enough, Quart says technology is eliminating or degrading professions at a furious rate that will only increase, as “roughly 30% of the tasks within 60% of our current American occupations could soon be turned over to robots.”

The list of affected professions reads like a broad cross section of America, white-collar and blue-collar alike. Nurses, pharmacists, journalists, truckers, cashiers, tax preparers — very few professions will remain unaffected by advances in technology.

The problems have surprised many by reaching into the middle and upper-middle classes. The only people doing well in this economy, writes Quart, are the already wealthy, and our massive levels of income inequality are a significant factor.

“The United States is the richest and also the most unequal country in the world.”

Alissa Quart

“The United States is the richest and also the most unequal country in the world,” she writes. “It has the largest wealth inequality gap of the 200 countries in the [Credit Suisse Research Institute’s] Global Wealth Report of 2015. And when the top 1% has so much — so much more than even the top 5% or 10% — the middle class is financially and also mentally outclassed at each step.”

While the problems Quart lays out are sprawling and complex, she believes the only way out is to strengthen the social safety net. This includes considering solutions like universal basic income (UBI), which was first endorsed by President Richard Nixon in 1969 and is today supported by an unlikely mix of pundits on both sides of the political aisle.

“It’s like a monthly allowance for families and individuals that’s across the board, so it’s less of a handout for people specifically,” she says. “When I heard about it, I was thinking how much it would help, say, a mom I interviewed with two kids who had been laid off, or the professor who has a disabled kid and is on food stamps. If that person had $21,000 extra dollars a year through a basic income guarantee, would that have made all the difference?”

However we dig our way out — and especially if we don’t — Quart wants those who are struggling financially to realize that more and more people are in the same boat.

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/americas-middle-class-is-slowly-being-wiped-out-2018-07-23?link_id=8&can_id=2b32dd71eee2c646cce86d09c01c36dd&source=email-todays-headlines-jobs-with-justice-72418&email_referrer=email_389606&email_subject=todays-headlines-jobs-with-justice-72418&ns=prod%2Faccounts-mw

Gary Reber Comments:

As a nation, we have lost the essence of the “American Dream”––economic freedom and self-sufficiency realized through private property ownership rights and democratic government.

Our basic premises should be:

There is no genuine political liberty without economic liberty, and that which is destructive of economic liberty is necessarily destructive of political liberty. Liberty does not mean license to steal or hoard.

The “American Dream” of 1776 enunciated in the founding papers of the Republic, underwrote minimal Government and maximal individual political and economic liberty, and drew inspiration from the widely held view that life, liberty, and property were an inseparable trinity.

That dream has largely been converted into a nightmare in modern America through the concentrated control effects of giant Government and monopoly capitalism, which may be handmaidens in tyranny. This situation has come about because of philosophical thinking that is inadequate to meet the needs of the 21st century, thinking which has not kept pace with the fruits of science; and the situation is also due to a combination of conspiracy, greed, and archaic political philosophy.

In a modern, technological era it is the ownership of productive capital wealth, not the labor of people that is the primary creator of affluence.

Hence, it is access to ownership of productive capital wealth, not to jobs, wherein the national economic policy guidelines for the 21st century ought to lie. As ownership of productive capital wealth becomes widely diffused, political power ought also to be widely diffused.

Productive capital wealth is defined as the non-human means of producing products and services (land; structures; infrastructure; tools; human-intelligent and non-human-intelligent machines; super-automation; robotics; digital computerized processing and operations; certain intangibles that have the characteristics of property, such as patents and trade or firm names; and the like owned by people.

Tectonic shifts in the technologies of production are constant and result in new formations of productive capital wealth, whose role is to do ever more of the work, which produces income to the owners of the capital assets. People invented tools to reduce toil, enable otherwise impossible production, create new highly automated industries, and significantly change the way in which products and services are produced from labor intensive to capital intensive––the core function of technological invention.

Businesses employ both productive capital and people, but full employment is not an objective of businesses. Companies strive to keep labor input and other costs at a minimum in order to produce efficiently and profitably. Because of the ever-accelerating shift to productive capital to lower business operational costs, jobs are constantly being eroded. The other aspect impacting job security––the overwhelming source of income for the majority of Americans––is global competition and the sourcing of low-cost “slave” labor. As a result, American businesses seeking to compete in global markets and within the United States market, which is driven by low pricing demand, have out-sourced manufacturing to other countries whose labor costs are significantly lower and whose tax extraction rates and environmental regulations are respectively far less costly and stringent. Such out-sourcing is motivated by the market demand to produce their products and services more efficiently and more profitably.

This combination of free market forces means that private sector job creation in numbers that match the pool of people willing and able to work is constantly being eroded by physical productive capital’s ever-increasing role, compounded by far less costly out-sourcing of production.

As a result, there are fewer and fewer “customers with money” to purchase the products and services that can be more efficiently produced with productive capital. Economic growth will always be stalled when there are high levels of economic inequality because there will be an imbalance between production and consumption.

Why is this happening?

The reason is simple. A relative few people OWN the preponderance of the nation’s productive capital wealth and are positioned to OWN the FUTURE productive wealth, from which they earn dividend income and valuable capital gains asset growth. This is why there is widening economic inequality resulting in class conflict between the so-called 1 percent “successful” ownership class and the 99 percent, who are capital-less or under-capitalized, and whose ONLY source of income is a job or taxpayer supported government welfare derived from tax extraction and national debt. This Income inequality is exponentially crippling the United States from realizing its creative and social and just economic potential.

Thus, there is the imbalance between production and consumption. A few wealthy people are thereby able to rig the “system” to manipulate the lives of people who struggle with declining labor worker earnings and job opportunities, and then accumulate the bulk of the money through monopolized productive capital ownership. Our scientists, engineers, and executive managers who are not owners themselves, except for those in the highest employed positions, are encouraged to work to destroy employment by making the capital owner more productive. How much employment can be destroyed by substituting machines for people or lowering operational costs is a measure of their success––always focused on producing at the lowest cost. Only the people who already own productive capital are the beneficiaries of their work, as they systematically concentrate more and more capital ownership in their stationary 1 percent ranks. Yet the 1 percent are not the people who do the overwhelming consuming.The result is the consumer populous is not able to get the money to buy the products and services produced as a result of substituting “machines” for people or devaluing labor wages and salaries. And yet you can’t have mass production without mass human consumption. It is the exponential disassociation of production and consumption, which is the problem with the United States economy, and the reason that ordinary citizens must gain access to productive capital ownership to improve their economic well-being.

For the nation to overcome widening income inequality, the obvious, logical solution is for people to OWN THE “MACHINES” and non-human means of production that result from technology. Broadening productive capital ownership should be the priority course of action for the FUTURE. “FUTURE” is capitalized to emphasize that the private property rights of ALL citizens MUST be respected, honored, and protected. Thus, ANY solution(s) to transform the United States into an OWNERSHIP CULTURE must not undermine or seize the private property of the 1 to 10 percent who now own up to 90 percent of the corporate wealth. Instead, the solution(s) MUST expand the ownership pie over time and result in EVERY American child, woman and man earning income to support an affluent life. The result would be that those who now own America would still be owners but their percentage of the total ownership would decrease, as ownership gets broader and broader, and benefits the traditionally disenfranchised poor and working and middle class, who will become sought-after “customers with money.” Thus, productive capital income would be distributed more broadly and the demand for products and services would be distributed more broadly from the earnings of capital and result in the sustentation of consumer demand, which will promote economic growth. This also means that society can profitably employ unused and idle productive capacity and invest in more productive capacity to service the demands of a growth economy.

This balanced Just Third Way approach to building a FUTURE economy that supports affluence for EVERY American is presently not in the national discussion. It appears that the President of the United States, the elected Congressional representatives and Senators, academia, and the media are oblivious to this principled solution that has the ingredients to power economic growth at double-digit GNP rates.

This goal requires investment in FUTURE income-producing productive capital assets while simultaneously broadening private, individual ownership of the resulting expansion of existing large corporations and future corporations. Not only is employee ownership the norm to be sought wherever there are workers but beyond employee ownership the norm should be to create an OWNERSHIP CULTURE whereby EVERY American can benefit financially by owning a SUPER IRA-TYPE Capital Homestead Account (CHA) portfolio of income-producing, full-voting, full-dividend payout securities in America’s expanding corporations and those newly created to produce the future products and services needed and wanted by society.

This master plan agenda can be accomplished by applying the logic of corporate finance, which is self-financing and asset-backed credit for productive uses to grow the economy. People invest in capital ownership on the basis that the investment will pay for itself. The problem facing the nation is routed in the financial system, which must be reformed.

The solution is not to focus on JOB CREATION but to focus on OWNERSHIP CREATION whereby EVERY American can acquire private, individual ownership in FUTURE income-producing productive capital asset investments without the need to limit their financing requirements to past savings and/or require workers to reduce their consumption incomes to become owners. This is not about creating small businesses, which tend to be operated by hands-on entrepreneurs and proprietors, but about creating a viable portfolio of income-producing, full-dividend, full-voting stock ownership in large corporations, whereby there is no education and talent requirement to simply be a share owner. Large corporations are already publicly owned by millions of Americans. But what they have purchased is value-diluted stock through the “stock market exchanges,” purchased with their earnings as labor workers. Their stock holdings are relatively miniscule, as are their dividend payments compared to the top 10 percent of capital owners. And no one addresses whether Dow Jones gains have to do with the reality of the health of businesses. The stock market deals in secondhand securities, which essentially translates to a gaming casino. Wall Street has convinced us to see ourselves as “investors” instead of “gamblers” and “perceived values” instead of “bets.”

Conventionally, most people do not have the right to acquire productive capital with the self-financing earnings of capital; they are left to acquire, as best as they can, with their earnings as labor workers. This is fundamentally hard to do and limiting. Thus, the most important economic right Americans need and should demand is the effective right to acquire capital with the earnings of capital.

America has tried the Republican “cut spending, cut taxes, and cut ‘entitlements’” and the Democrat “protect ‘entitlements,’ provide tax-payer supported stimulus, lower middle and working class taxes, tax the rich and redistribute” brands of economic policy, as well as a mixture of both. Republican ideology aims to revive hard-nosed laissez-faire appeals to hard-core conservatives but ignores the relevancy of healing the economy and halting the steady disintegration of the middle class and working poor. Unfortunately, not enough conservative thinkers have acknowledged the damaging results of a laissez-faire ideology, which furthers the concentration of productive capital ownership. They are floundering in search of alternative thinking as they acknowledge the negative economic and social realities resulting from greed capitalism or “Hoggism.”

The Just Third Way is a balanced approach, which encompasses the realization that the troubling economic and social trends (global capitalism, free-trade doctrine, tectonic shifts in the technologies of production and the steady off-loading of American manufacturing and jobs) caused by continued concentrated ownership of productive capital wealth will threaten the stability of contemporary liberal democracies and dethrone democratic ideology, as it is now understood. Without a policy shift to broaden productive capital ownership simultaneously with economic growth, further development of technology and globalization will undermine the American middle class and make it impossible for more than a minority of citizens to achieve middle-class status.

Economic democracy has yet to be tried. We are absent a national discussion of where consumers earn the money to buy products and services and the nature of capital ownership, and instead argue about policies to redistribute income or not to redistribute income.

But how will we ever achieve affluence for EVERY American and eliminate poverty and reliance on taxpayer-supported government welfare, which is fueling national debt? This will require a return to higher income tax and corporate tax rates, which are lowered or entirely eliminated when corporations have demonstrated growth decisions that enable their workers and other citizens to finance their future growth and share in the companies’ fate as share owners. This would enable us to more effectively create investment stimulus incentives through reduced tax rates. While tax and investment stimulus incentives are excellent tools to strengthen economic growth, without the requirement that productive capital ownership is broadened simultaneously, the result will continue to further concentrate productive capital ownership among those who already own, and further create dependency with redistribution policies and programs to sustain purchasing power on the part of the 99 percent of the population who are dependent on their labor worker earnings or welfare to sustain their livelihood. By stimulating economic growth tied to broadened productive capital ownership the benefits are two-fold: one is that over time the 99 percenters will financially benefit from acquiring productive capital assets that are paid for out of the future earnings of the investments and gain greater access to job opportunities that a growth economy generates.

Starting with the business corporation, a legal entity created and sanctioned by state and federal government and judicial law, the government should provide tax incentives for full-dividend payouts to its stockholders, or alternatively legislate that from now on 100 percent of all profits be paid out fully as dividend payments to stockholders (thus, eliminating the corporate income tax), subject to individual taxation. This would effectively prohibit retained earnings financing of new productive capital formation (reinvesting the corporate earnings already earned). The government could also limit debt financing by legislating some ratio formula to annual revenue under which a corporation could debt finance new productive capital formation with borrowed monies. Both retained earnings and debt financing only enhance the ownership holding value of the existing corporate ownership class and do nothing to create new owners. Thus, the rich get richer systematically and capital ownership concentration is furthered, facilitated by financing further productive capital acquisition out of the earnings of existing productive capital.

In place of retained earnings and debt financing, the government should incentivize business corporations to issue and sell full-voting, full-dividend payout stock to more people to underwrite new productive capital formation, with the purpose of providing opportunity for new owners, both employees of corporations and non-employees, to participate in a growing economy. This approach can be applied to singular corporations or multiple corporate diversification facilitated with private capital credit insurance or a government reinsurance agency (ala the Federal Housing Administration concept). This would provide the solution to the need for a financial mechanism put in place that will guarantee loan risks; otherwise banks and lending institutions will not make the loans, and the system will continue to limit access to capital acquisition to those who already own capital—the rich. This is because “poor” people have no security or collateral, or sufficient income to pledge against the loan as security, and/or are disqualified on the grounds of either unproven unreliability or proven unreliability.

Criteria must be created to qualify the corporations subject to this policy and those corporations that qualify overseen so as to ensure that their executives exercise prudent fiduciary responsibility to generate loan payback. Once the guaranteed loans are paid back, the new capital formation will continue to produce income for existing and future owners, and subsequently provide “customers with money” to support the output of the economy.

This approach would use the existing taxing power of government in a way to restructure the economy along the guidelines of universal access to ownership of productive capital wealth with a thrust toward the creation of new wealth.

The ultimate result of the use of the taxing power of government to stimulate the widespread access to ownership of productive capital wealth should be a growing independence of an economically emancipated people both from reliance upon government and from the wage slavery brought into being by monopolistic and oligarchic ownership; and the role and function in our lives both of government and of monopoly and oligarchy ownership ought to diminish.

The national goal should be to foster an economic policy direction toward broadening private ownership participation for all people in the capital wealth base of our economy.

The American Dream since the time of the Founding Fathers has been to foster individually owned free enterprise. Our economic policies, and tax laws foster concentration of business ownership in the hands of a wealthy few by subsidizing and favoring narrowly owned conglomerates and monopolistic combines. This is not good. We need a new economic policy thrust, which will promote the birth of profitable new business enterprises and expand the ownership of large corporations, while stimulating the entrepreneurial creative spirit of business innovators.

This is an agenda for “a quiet revolution”––a national movement for economic justice, tax equity, and governmental responsibility. The thrust of this movement is to focus upon tax reformation and economic policy. To guide this movement toward realizing the goal of economic justice positive and constructive reforms in the tax laws, policies, and procedures of the U.S. Government will be necessary.

When the Federal income tax was authorized by the 16th amendment to the Constitution, it was designed to levy taxes in a progressive and fair way on all income, “from whatever source derived,” in order to pay for the legitimate functions of Government as authorized by the people through their elected representatives.

But, over the years, exception after exception has been made to this principle; tax loopholes have allowed the wealthy and the wealthy owners of the corporations to escape high taxes. This means that the tax burden has fallen increasingly on low- and moderate-income working people.

The average American worker works at least 2 out of 5 days just to pay taxes, while scores of wealthy people with incomes over $1 million pay no Federal income taxes at all.

This is not just.

There is hardly any progressivity in taxation. Those with low and moderate incomes pay a higher percentage in taxes than those with higher incomes.

Tax loopholes and Government subsidies are really a welfare program for the rich.

Recommendations For Tax Reformation: A Just Tax Concept For The U.S. Government

Implicit in the original income tax concept was the “ability-to-pay-theory,” that those who earn or receive more income should pay a progressively larger proportion of their incomes to support Government.

Another concept inherent in the original income tax law was that Government should limit in some manner the vast personal incomes derived by a few people or legal entities owning huge amounts of capital wealth and property.

Tax policies today encourage concentration of capital wealth and property, generating on one hand a huge governmental bureaucracy to regulate centralized economic activity, and on the other hand, an ever-expanding number of economically dependent people requiring another huge government bureaucracy to administer to their needs.

The economic, social, and legal injustices of our society are fostered by tax policies which enable the rich to become richer, while the majority of the working people, the elderly, small businessmen, family farmers, and poor pay the taxes.

As a nation, we must adopt an economic policy designed to broaden private individual ownership of all forms of property––particularly property ownership rights which yield viable incomes to people. The function of Federal tax policy then should be to encourage broadened ownership, and discourage private concentrations of capital wealth and excessive personal incomes from property holdings.

For genuine tax reform, positive, constructive, and just reforms in tax law, with review every 5 years or less, are needed.

Recommended Tax Reforms

  1. Personal earned incomes and property-derived incomes

The tax rate would be a single rate for all incomes of natural persons from all sources above a personal exemption level so that the budget could be balanced automatically and even allow the government to pay off the growing unsustainable long-term debt, but the poor would pay the first dollar over their exemption levels as would the hedge fund operator and others now earning billions of dollars from capital gains, dividends, rents and other property incomes which under some tax proposals would be exempted from any taxes. Provide an exemption of $100,000 for a family of four to meet their ordinary living needs.

Eliminate the payroll tax on workers and their employers, but pay out of general revenues for all promises for Social Security, Medicare, Medicare, government pensions, health, education, rent and subsistence vouchers for the poor until their new jobs and ownership accumulations provide new incomes to substitute for the taxpayer dollars to fill these needs.

  1. Inheritance and estate taxes

As a substitute for inheritance and gift taxes, a transfer tax would be imposed on the recipients whose holdings exceeded $1 million, thus encouraging the super-rich to spread out their monopoly-sized estates to all members of their family, friends, servants and workers who helped create their fortunes, teachers, health workers, police, other public servants, military veterans, artists, the poor and the disabled.

Each year tens of billions of dollars in capital wealth assets is passed along to heirs under current tax laws. The revenues generated from inheritance taxes should be pledged to support the Social Security program, thus achieving a reduction in Social Security taxes, which are becoming a tax burden.

  1. Corporations and business taxes for non-small business enterprises
  2. Investment credit tax incentives––The net result of new capital wealth formation is to create more productive land, industrial plant and equipment, machinery, tools, et cetera. In a highly technological economy the purpose of scientific advancement is not to create jobs (labor intensive production), but to substitute more efficient machines, buildings, tools, and productive land for labor; that is, human work effort. This is the basis of increasing productivity, and has been since the invention of the wheel to today’s age of cybernetics. Invention and innovation are supposed to save labor and free people for the enjoyment of the good life, the pursuant of happiness, and the improvement of their minds and bodies––to enable the fulfillment of the needs of the flesh (man’s material needs and well-being), so that the works of the soul may flow.

With an economic policy designed to foster widespread private equity ownership participation in the capital wealth assets of our economy, the use and purpose of the investment tax credit device as a special governmental subsidy to private corporations has a significant potential for encouraging broader ownership of income-producing productive property rights among all people.

If an investment tax credit is given to a business organization, it should be limited to finance real new capital wealth expansion for widespread private ownership participation by individuals and families.

The Federal Reserve should stop monetizing unproductive debt and begin creating an asset-backed currency that could enable every child, woman and man to establish a Capital Homestead Account or “CHA” (a super-IRA or asset tax-shelter for citizens) at their local bank to acquire a growing dividend-bearing stock portfolio to supplement their incomes from work and all other sources of income. The CHA would process an equal allocation of productive credit to every citizen exclusively for purchasing full-dividend payout shares in companies needing funds for growing the economy and private sector jobs for local, national and global markets. The shares would be purchased on credit wholly backed by projected “future savings” in the form of new productive capital assets as well as the future marketable goods and services produced by the newly added technology, renewable energy systems, plant, rentable space and infrastructure added to the economy. Risk of default on each stock acquisition loan would be covered by private sector capital credit risk insurance and reinsurance, but would not require citizens to reduce their funds for consumption to purchase shares.

  1. Nonpublic close corporations––All non-publicly registered and traded corporations, that is, those that are close corporations owned by a few people, and not classified un definitions set by the Small Business Administration, Department of Commerce, as a “small business,” or whose stock is not traded on the open markets and broadly owned, should be taxed as personal holding companies. The tax policy for close corporations, which by their nature concentrate wealth and limit free enterprise, should result in expanded ownership of capital wealth and discourage such organizations.

The income of such corporations should be treated as the personal incomes of their owners and taxed at personal income tax rates as herein recommended.

This tax policy will discourage private concentrations of capital wealth, and encourage viable small businesses and widespread private popular ownership shares in the small and large business corporations of America.

  1. Public corporations––Tax policy of the Federal Government should encourage broad private ownership of public corporations, Publicly registered business corporations should be taxed on a basis which encourages broad ownership and the fullest distribution of earnings to their owners.

The following tax policies for all publicly owned private corporations should be applied, based upon the philosophy that a corporation is a creature of the State, created by law, recognized as an “artificial person,” able to amass vast amounts of capital wealth with limited liability, and can have a life in perpetuity. Since a corporation is a legally created entity, and not a human being, its function, powers responsibilities, and ownership are a matter of significant social, political, and economic policy.

Public corporations should be taxed as follows:

If profits are retained, that is, reinvested and not paid to the stockholder-owners, the corporation will pay a 90 percent tax on retained earnings.

Dividends paid out to stockholders-owners would be deductible from corporate earnings thus making these earnings subject to personal income tax rates.

All subsidiary corporations and partially or wholly owned enterprises of a parent or holding corporation will be taxed as a separate enterprise entity, as under the above recommended policy.

  1. Business sole proprietorships and partnerships, and close corporations classified as small business

No change in existing tax procedure are necessary, except that the tax rate on such business incomes would be the same for individuals.

  1. Capital gains tax–non-public corporations and close corporations

For individuals, capital gains realized on the sale of a personal residence, owned and occupied by a natural person or persons and/or a family would be taxed at the personal income tax rate.

All other capital gains in property interests (real or personal, securities et cetera) unless exchanged within 1 year for property of equivalent value, would be taxed at the personal income tax rate.

  1. Capital property holdings tax: Limits on ownership

All individuals, whether their property is combined with others in joint tenancies, co-tenancies, or community property holdings of natural persons should be subject to a capital property holdings tax if the certified net worth or equity value of the property holding of the taxpayer exceeds $1 million.

  1. Tax loopholes and subsidies

Eliminate all.

Legitimate Functions Of Government And Governmental Responsibility

Tax policy must, by necessity, be linked to a definition of the legitimate functions of Government and governmental responsibility with respect to the uses of Federal tax revenues.

Therefore, the tax revenues flowing to the Federal Government as a result of these recommendations should be used for the following purposes:

  1. Promote the general welfare for all people.
  2. Encourage viable and broadly owned business enterprise, and a free competitive market.
  3. Foster broad private individual ownership of the capital wealth base of our economy.
  4. Insure a fair and meaningful stake among individuals in the future of our nation.
  5. Promote economic justice for all people.
  6. Enhance civilization, and encourage the arts, science, significant educations, and other creative human endeavors.
  7. Guarantee individual liberty, and economic security and independence for all people.
  8. Promote peace and world enrichment, while providing for the common defense.
  9. Encourage community enhancement and environmental quality.
  10. Enhance life, health, and personal happiness for all people.
  11. Foster domestic tranquility and fraternity.
  12. Encourage human tolerance, respect, and personal responsibility and dignity.
  13. Promote mutual cooperation and trust for mutual benefit for all people.

The ultimate result that we should seek is growing independence of an economically emancipated people both from reliance upon government and from the wage slavery brought into being by monopolistic and oligarchic ownership, and the role and function in our lives both of government and of monopoly and oligarchic ownership ought to diminish.

Recommendations For Future Study

While these tax reform recommendations will generate substantial revenue increases to the Federal Government, strengthen the nation, and result in reducing the burden upon all poor and working people, particularly those families with incomes under $30,000 per year, an in-depth study is necessary to determine the full impact of such a new tax and economic policy thrust, as herein advocated.

A Tax Reformation Commission should established by the U.S. Congress to conduct an in-depth study of these tax reform recommendations and those of others to determine the impact of these measures on the economy, the structure of private property ownership and free enterprise, the concentration of wealth, income distribution, and revenues generated to the Federal Government.

The U.S. Congress should establish a census of wealth valuation inventory. Every 5 years, the Commissioner of Internal Revenue, in conjunction with the Bureau of the Census, should conduct a valuation census of the property holding of all individuals, held in accordance with regulations published in the Federal Register. These records should be treated with the same confidentiality as is presently given to personal income tax records.

The wealth valuation computations for each individual would be used to establish one’s priority relative to other individuals for qualifying for Government programs aimed at strengthening the self-sufficiency of the individual through acquisition and ownership of new and/or transferred capital wealth assets.

Concluding Remarks

The fact is that political democracy is impossible without economic democracy. Those who control money control the laws that foster wage slavery, welfare slavery, debt slavery and charity slavery. These laws can and should be changed by the 99 percent and those among the 1 percent who are committed to a just and economically classless market economy, true equality of opportunity, and a level playing field in the future for 100 percent of Americans. By adopting economic policies and programs that acknowledge every citizen’s right to become a capital owner as well as a labor worker, the result will be an end to perpetual labor servitude and the liberation of people from progressive increments of subsistence toil and compulsive poverty as the 99 percent benefits from the rewards of productive capital-sourced income.

A National Right To Capital Ownership Bill that restores the American dream should be advocated by the progressive movement, which addresses the reality of Americans facing job opportunity deterioration and devaluation due to tectonic shifts in the technologies of production.

The Federal Reserve Bank should be used to provide interest-free capital credit (including only transaction and risk premiums) and monetize each capital formation transaction, determined by the same expertise that determines it today––management and banks––that each transaction is viably feasible so that there is virtually no risk in the Federal Reserve. The Federal Reserve Board is already empowered under Section 13 of the Federal Reserve Act to reform monetary policy to discourage non-productive uses of credit, to encourage accelerated rates of private sector growth, and to promote widespread individual access to productive credit as a fundamental right of citizenship. The Federal Reserve Board needs to re-activate its discount mechanism to encourage private sector growth linked to expanded capital ownership opportunities for all Americans.

The labor union movement should transform to a producers’ ownership union movement and embrace and fight for this new democratic capitalism. They should play the part that they have always aspired to––that is, a better and easier life through participation in the nation’s economic growth and progress. As a result, labor unions will be able to broaden their functions, revitalize their constituency, and reverse their decline. Unfortunately, at the present time the movement is built on one-factor economics––the labor worker. The insufficiency of labor worker earnings to purchase increasingly capital-produced products and services gave rise to labor laws and labor unions designed to coerce higher and higher prices for the same or reduced labor input. With government assistance, unions have gradually converted productive enterprises in the private and public sectors into welfare institutions.

The unions should reassess their role of bargaining for more and more income for the same work or less and less work, and embrace a cooperative approach to survival, whereby they redefine “more” income for their workers in terms of the combined wages of labor and capital on the part of the workforce. They should continue to represent the workers as labor workers in all the aspects that are represented today––wages, hours, and working conditions––and, in addition, represent workers as full voting stockowners as capital ownership is built into the workforce. What is needed is leadership to define “more” as two ways to earn income.

If we continue with the past’s unworkable trickle-down economic policies, governments will have to continue to use the coercive power of taxation to redistribute income that is made by people who earn it and give it to those who need it. This results in ever deepening massive debt on local, state, and national government levels, which leads to the citizenry becoming parasites instead of enabling people to become productive in the way that products and services are actually produced.

There is a solution to America’s economic decline, which will result in double-digit economic growth and simultaneously broaden private, individual ownership so that EVERY American’s income significantly grows, providing the means to support themselves and their families with an affluent lifestyle. The Just Third Way Master Plan for America’s future is published at http://foreconomicjustice.org/?p=5797.









https://sites.google.com/a/cinfoshare.org/cis/education/prep-with-jen









Principal, 
Tel: (301)906-6889; 
(240)912-6290
Licensed in MD, VA, DC, WV, PA, DE, NC, SC, FL 
WeChat ID: sunnychenyuqing
NMLS # 1220187


President, Principal Loan Consultant, Leader Funding, Inc.
Wechat ID: Willow6621
NMLS # 208136


电话: (240) 784-6645


RockvilleMD 
Phone: 301-366-3497



专业冷暖系統 MAJOR.HVAC
Simon Lin


Comments