The few countries (in the world) that have higher gdp per capita than the US have drastically lower populations and large quantities of marketable resources. The main factor that skews the argument in favor of the redistributionists (superficially) Is that in addition to having one of the highest gdp per capitas in the world, we also have one of the highest number of very rich people in the world.
You seem to have missed my statement:
it doesn't actually solve the problem.
the government has been transferring wealth from years and years and it hasn't solved the problem.
while people that are now rich saved and invested other people didn't. their investments have paid off.
other than stealing money from someone how do you propose to close the gap?
The government can reform the tax code making it more beneficial to companies to pay people.
we desperately need tax code reform not only for individuals but for corporations.
I suggest lowering the corporate tax to 10%. eliminating the majority of deductions except for these.
healthcare, pay (non-executive) and expansion.
so the more pay and benefits and job expansion that companies do the bigger tax deduction they get.
it only makes sense.
the government spends nothing and gains a whole ton of new business investment as more companies would come here and hire people.
and get rid of obamacare that has destroyed the middle class and lower classes.
The government has been transferring wealth for decades. From the poor to the rich.
About income inequality
The Incessant Myth of the Growing Wealth Gap | The Fiscal Times:
Income inequality and the myth of the 1% and the 99% - Fortune
Dispelling Myths About Income Inequality - ForbesInequality Myths | Cato Institute
GDP per capita and PPP:
GDP per Capita Ranking 2015 | Data and Charts - knoema.com
Or maybe, welfare effectiveness is not the cause.Further, I did not claim it was a result of welfare effectiveness. I claimed is was an example of the lack of welfare effectiveness.
No, I caught your statements. First, you claimed that the social democracies of Europe have lower per capita GDP than the US (even though that's not true) which demonstrated the ineffectiveness of social welfare polices. Once the higher per capita GDP of some European nations was pointed out to you, you pivoted to arguing that per capita GDP is affected by population and natural resources.You seem to have missed my statement:
The truth is, per capita GDP is the result of many factors. Unless you're going to present a case that includes an accounting for all of those factors, your argument is nothing more than baseless claims motivated by partisan hackery