Comments on: Laissez-Faire Restored; Workers Left Behind

By: Stagnant Thinking: An Introduction « Vox Nova

Stagnant Thinking: An Introduction « Vox Nova — Thu, 14 May 2009 02:24:34 +0000

[...] for the supposed stagnation, among libertarians government is the natural culprit). I know that several of my co-bloggers have also made some version of the claim at one point or [...]

By: Stagnant Thinking: An Introduction « Blackadder’s Lair

Stagnant Thinking: An Introduction « Blackadder’s Lair — Thu, 14 May 2009 02:22:42 +0000

[...] for the supposed stagnation, among libertarians government is the natural culprit). I know that several of my co-bloggers have also made some version of the claim at one point or [...]

By: On Sharing the Wealth « Vox Nova

On Sharing the Wealth « Vox Nova — Thu, 30 Oct 2008 19:14:02 +0000

[...] expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion“. In the current economic climate of rising inequality, where the benefits of growth have accrued only to the rich, the case for progressivity becomes [...]

By: Obama, McCain, and Tax Progressivity « Vox Nova

Obama, McCain, and Tax Progressivity « Vox Nova — Thu, 12 Jun 2008 19:32:32 +0000

[...] I have noted before, we live in an era of rising inequality, witnessing levels of income disparity not seen since the [...]

By: Democrats, Republicans, and the Economy « Vox Nova

Democrats, Republicans, and the Economy « Vox Nova — Thu, 03 Apr 2008 19:54:40 +0000

[...] to emphasize on this blog in the context of Catholic social teaching, including how workers are increasingly being left behind and how the so-called “Reagan revolution” was largely a [...]

By: Regulation is Evil « Vox Nova

Regulation is Evil « Vox Nova — Tue, 25 Mar 2008 16:39:05 +0000

[...] system. Except that nothing of value was being produced in these transactions. Except that inequality skyrocketed as median incomes stagnated. In prior generations, these great disparities would have been frowned upon, but no longer– [...]

By: Tony

Tony — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 17:54:55 +0000

You talk like inequity is a bad thing.

By: TeutonicTim

TeutonicTim — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 04:00:29 +0000

I’m going to be obnoxious for a second and offer a separate interpretation of that graph:

Lyndon Johnson’s “great society” programs started in 1965 and went through his presidency. His vast increases in “social programs” caused many people to embrace them and drop into a mode of apathy. Since then, more and more people have been born into this system causing the burden on those outside of the system to become higher and the amount of people sharing in the wealth of the economy to plummet. You can see the effects of this on the graph where the line skyrockets right around the time these programs would start to have an effect on the economy.

Sounds about as plausible as the evil reaganomics.

By: David Raber

David Raber — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 03:48:53 +0000

Blackadder, I did some spot checking just to make sure that my general impression was not a result of indoctrination by the liberal media, and it seems to be the case that the percentage of Americans not covered by health insurance has gone up streadily since 1977.

As for the level of suffering due to our economy today compared to forty years ago, my point was about anxiety specifically, but I don’t have any statistics on that.

And we could argue about these statistics endlessly. The real crux of the biscuit is how we as Catholics ought to look at our system, understand it and deal with it as employees, bosses, mommies, public policy makers, and so on.

What is the nature of the market system after all? A view which I think does not conflict with Catholic teaching sees it as a necessary evil, like for example the armed forces or the police.

Can we doubt that if we did not live in a fallen world, we would not need armed forces, police, or a market economy?

The market economy helps keep us sinners in line (See St. Paul: You don’t work, you don’t eat), and gives us incentives to work hard and be creative, incentives such as we sinners understand.

This is not the whole picture, but a great part of it, and it does not necessarily paint the market economy in entirely dark tones–not at all. It is an evil, yes, but also quite necessary–like the police, again. We wish we didn’t need police–and we know the police are prone to act badly from time to time, and we sure don’t want to see those flashing lights in our rear-view mirror, and we notice how that one cousin became a cop and that other one a mafioso. . . and yet we honor the occupation as a career of service, which it is at its best, and we sure appreciate that blue uniform showing up to help when we are in trouble.

So, emphasixe the evil or the necessary as you will, but both aspects are in there.

By: The Reaganomics Myth « Vox Nova

The Reaganomics Myth « Vox Nova — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 23:12:14 +0000

[...] Reaganomics Myth This a a follow-up to yesterday’s post about the fact that shifting norms and institutions meant that productivity gains were no longer [...]

By: Morning's Minion

Morning's Minion — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 21:58:58 +0000

OK, he is focusing on administrative complexity rather either poverty alleviation or work incentives.

By: Blackadder

Blackadder — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 21:06:31 +0000

Here is a more positive account of the EITC, also by Delong, from 2000:

http://www.j-bradford-delong.net/TotW/EITC.html