Aftershock: The Next Economy and America's Future et plus d'un million d'autres livres sont disponibles pour le Kindle d'Amazon. En savoir plus

Amazon Rachète votre article
Recevez un chèque-cadeau de EUR 0,97
Amazon Rachète cet article
Vous l'avez déjà ? Vendez votre exemplaire ici
Désolé, cet article n'est pas disponible en
Image non disponible pour la
couleur :
Image non disponible

 
Commencez à lire Aftershock: The Next Economy and America's Future sur votre Kindle en moins d'une minute.

Vous n'avez pas encore de Kindle ? Achetez-le ici ou téléchargez une application de lecture gratuite.

Aftershock: The Next Economy and America's Future [Anglais] [Broché]

Robert B. Reich
5.0 étoiles sur 5  Voir tous les commentaires (1 commentaire client)

Voir les offres de ces vendeurs.


Formats

Prix Amazon Neuf à partir de Occasion à partir de
Format Kindle EUR 7,93  
Relié, Séquence inédite --  
Relié --  
Broché --  
Vendez cet article - Prix de rachat jusqu'à EUR 0,97
Vendez Aftershock: The Next Economy and America's Future contre un chèque-cadeau d'une valeur pouvant aller jusqu'à EUR 0,97, que vous pourrez ensuite utiliser sur tout le site Amazon.fr. Les valeurs de rachat peuvent varier (voir les critères d'éligibilité des produits). En savoir plus sur notre programme de reprise Amazon Rachète.

Offres spéciales et liens associés


Les clients ayant consulté cet article ont également regardé


Descriptions du produit

Extrait

1

Eccles’s Insight

The Federal Reserve Board, arguably the most powerful group of economic decision-makers in the world, is housed in the Eccles Building on Constitution Avenue in Washington, D.C. A long, white, mausoleum-like structure, the building is named after Marriner Eccles, who chaired the Board from November 1934 until April 1948. These were crucial years in the history of the American economy, and the world’s.

While Eccles is largely forgotten today, he offered critical insight into the great pendulum of American capitalism. His analysis of the underlying economic stresses of the Great Depression is extraordinarily, even eerily, relevant to the Crash of 2008. It also offers if not a blueprint for the future, at least a suggestion of what to expect in the coming years.

A small, slender man with dark eyes and a pale, sharp face, Eccles was born in Logan, Utah, in 1890. His father, David Eccles, a poor Mormon immigrant from Glasgow, Scotland, had come to Utah, married two women, became a businessman, and made a fortune. Young Marriner, one of David’s twenty-one children, trudged off to Scotland at the start of 1910 as a Mormon missionary but returned home two years later to become a bank president. By age twenty-four he was a millionaire; by forty he was a tycoon—director of railroad, hotel, and insurance companies; head of a bank holding company controlling twenty-six banks; and president of lumber, milk, sugar, and construction companies spanning the Rockies to the Sierra Nevadas.

In the Crash of 1929, his businesses were sufficiently diverse and his banks adequately capitalized that he stayed afloat financially. But he was deeply shaken when his assumption that the economy would quickly return to normal was, as we know, proved incorrect. “Men I respected assured me that the economic crisis was only temporary,” he wrote, “and that soon all the things that had pulled the country out of previous depressions would operate to that same end once again. But weeks turned to months. The months turned to a year or more. Instead of easing, the economic crisis worsened.” He himself had come to realize by late 1930 that something was profoundly wrong, not just with the economy but with his own understanding of it. “I awoke to find myself at the bottom of a pit without any known means of scaling its sheer sides. . . . I saw for the first time that though I’d been active in the world of finance and production for seventeen years and knew its techniques, I knew less than nothing about its economic and social effects.” Everyone who relied on him—family, friends, business associates, the communities that depended on the businesses he ran—expected him to find a way out of the pit. “Yet all I could find within myself was despair.”

When Eccles’s anxious bank depositors began demanding their money, he called in loans and reduced credit in order to shore up the banks’ reserves. But the reduced lending caused further economic harm. Small businesses couldn’t get the loans they needed to stay alive. In spite of his actions, Eccles had nagging concerns that by tightening credit instead of easing it, he and other bankers were saving their banks at the expense of community—in “seeking individual salvation, we were contributing to collective ruin.”

Economists and the leaders of business and Wall Street—including financier Bernard Baruch; W. W. Atterbury, president of the Pennsylvania Railroad; and Myron Taylor, chairman of the United States Steel Corporation—sought to reassure the country that the market would correct itself automatically, and that the government’s only responsibility was to balance the federal budget. Lower prices and interest rates, they said, would inevitably “lure ‘natural new investments’ by men who still had money and credit and whose revived activity would produce an upswing in the economy.” Entrepreneurs would put their money into new technologies that would lead the way to prosperity. But Eccles wondered why anyone would invest when the economy was so severely disabled. Such investments, he reasoned, “take place in a climate of high prosperity, when the purchasing power of the masses increases their demands for a higher standard of living and enables them to purchase more than their bare wants. In the America of the thirties what hope was there for developments on the technological frontier when millions of our people hadn’t enough purchasing power for even their barest needs?”

There was a more elaborate and purportedly “ethical” argument offered by those who said nothing could be done. Many of those business leaders and economists of the day believed “a depression was the scientific operation of economic laws that were God-given and not man-made. They could not be interfered with.” They said depressions were phenomena like the one described in the biblical story of Joseph and the seven kine, in which Pharaoh dreamed of seven bountiful years followed by seven years of famine, and that America was now experiencing the lean years that inevitably followed the full ones. Eccles wrote, “They further explained that we were in the lean years because we had been spendthrifts and wastrels in the roaring twenties. We had wasted what we earned instead of saving it. We had enormously inflated values. But in time we would sober up and the economy would right itself through the action of men who had been prudent and thrifty all along, who had saved their money and at the right time would reinvest it in new production. Then the famine would end.”

Eccles thought this was nonsense. A devout Mormon, he saw that what passed for the God-given operation of economics “was nothing more than a determination of this or that interest, specially favored by the status quo, to resist any new rules that might be to their disadvantage.” He wrote, “It became apparent to me, as a capitalist, that if I lent myself to this sort of action and resisted any change designed to benefit all the people, I could be consumed by the poisons of social lag I had helped create.” Eccles also saw that “men with great economic power had an undue influence in making the rules of the economic game, in shaping the actions of government that enforced those rules, and in conditioning the attitude taken by people as a whole toward those rules. After I had lost faith in my business heroes, I concluded that I and everyone else had an equal right to share in the process by which economic rules are made and changed.” One of the country’s most powerful economic leaders concluded that the economic game was not being played on a level field. It was tilted in favor of those with the most wealth and power.





Eccles made his national public debut before the Senate Finance Committee in February 1933, just weeks before Franklin D. Roosevelt was sworn in as president. The committee was holding hearings on what, if anything, should be done to deal with the ongoing economic crisis. Others had advised reducing the national debt and balancing the federal budget, but Eccles had different advice. Anticipating what British economist John Maynard Keynes would counsel three years later in his famous General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money, Eccles told the senators that the government had to go deeper into debt in order to offset the lack of spending by consumers and businesses. Eccles went further. He advised the senators on ways to get more money into the hands of the beleaguered middle class. He offered a precise program designed “to bring about, by Government action, an increase of purchasing power on the part of all the people.”

Eccles arrived at these ideas not by any temperamental or cultural affinity—he was, after all, a banker and of Scottish descent—but by logic and experience. He understood the economy from the ground up. He saw how average people responded to economic downturns, and how his customers reacted to the deep crisis at hand. He merely connected the dots. His proposed program included relief for the unemployed, government spending on public works, government refinancing of mortgages, a federal minimum wage, federally supported old-age pensions, and higher income taxes and inheritance taxes on the wealthy in order to control capital accumulations and avoid excessive speculation. Not until these recommendations were implemented, Eccles warned, could the economy be fully restored.

Eccles then returned to Utah, from where he watched Roosevelt hatch the first hundred days of his presidency. To Eccles, the new president’s initiatives seemed barely distinguishable from what his predecessor, Herbert Hoover, had offered—a hodgepodge of ideas cooked up by Wall Street to keep it afloat but do little for anyone else. “New York, as usual, seems to be in the saddle, dominating fiscal and monetary policy,” he wrote to his friend George Dern, the former governor of Utah who had become Roosevelt’s secretary of war.

In mid-December 1933, Eccles received a telegram from Roosevelt’s Treasury secretary, Henry Morgenthau, Jr., asking him to return to Washington at the earliest possible date to “talk about monetary matters.” Eccles was perplexed. The new administration had shown no interest in his ideas. He had never met Morgenthau, who was a strong advocate for balancing the federal budget. After their meeting, the mystery only deepened. Morgenthau asked Eccles to write a report on monetary policy, which Eccles could as easily have written in Utah. A few days later Morgenthau invited Eccles to his home, where he asked about Eccles’s business connections, his personal finances, and the condition of his businesses, namely whether any had gone bankrupt. Finally, Morgenthau took Eccles into his confidence. “You’ve been recommended as someone I should get to help me in the Treasury Department,” Morgenthau said. Eccles was taken aback, and asked for a few days to think about it.

“‘Here you are, Marriner, full of talk about what the government should and shouldn’t do,’” Eccles told himself, as he later recounted in his memoirs. “‘You ought to put up or shut up. . . . You’re afraid your theory won’t work. You’re afraid you’ll be a damned fool. You want to stick it out in Utah and wear the hair shirt of a prophet crying in the wilderness. You can feel noble that way, and you run no risks. [But] if you don’t come here you’ll probably regret it for the rest of your life.’” Eccles talked himself into the job.

For many months thereafter, Eccles steeped himself in the work of the Treasury and the Roosevelt administration, pushing his case for why the government needed to go deeper into debt to prop up the economy, and what it needed to do for average people. Apparently he made progress. Roosevelt’s budget of 1934 contained many of Eccles’s ideas, violating the president’s previous promise to balance the federal budget. The president “swallowed the violation with considerable difficulty,” Eccles wrote.

The following summer, after the governor of the Federal Reserve Board unexpectedly resigned, Morgenthau recommend-ed Eccles for the job. Eccles had not thought about the Fed as a vehicle for advancing his ideas. But a few weeks later, when the president summoned him to the White House to ask if he’d be interested, Eccles told Roosevelt he’d take the job if the Federal Reserve in Washington had more power over the supply of money, and the New York Fed (dominated by Wall Street bankers), less. Eccles knew Wall Street wanted a tight money supply and correspondingly high interest rates, but the Main Streets of America—the real economy—needed a loose money supply and low rates. Roosevelt agreed to support new legislation that would tip the scales toward Main Street. Eccles took over the Fed.

For the next fourteen years, with great vigor and continuing vigilance for the welfare of average people, Eccles helped steer the economy through the remainder of the Depression and through World War II. He would also become one of the architects of the Great Prosperity that the nation and much of the rest of the world enjoyed after the war.


From the Hardcover edition.

Revue de presse

“Important and well executed. . . . Reich is fluent, fearless, even amusing.”
The New York Times Book Review
 
“A good read. . . . [Reich] provides a thoughtful dialogue about the structural problems that led to the recent recession. . . . His ideas are worth exploring.”
The Washington Post
 
“One of the clearest explanations to date of . . . how the United States went from . . . ‘the Great Prosperity’ of 1947 to 1975 to the Great Recession.”
—Bob Herbert, The New York Times

“All Americans will benefit from reading this insightful, timely book.”
—Bill Bradley

“Lucid and cogent.”
Kirkus
 
“Well argued and frighteningly plausible: without a return to the “basic bargain” (that workers are also consumers), the “aftershock” of the Great Recession includes a long-term high unemployment and a political backlash—a crisis, he notes with a sort of grim optimism, that just might be painful enough to encourage necessary structural reforms.”
Publishers Weekly


Détails sur le produit

  • Broché: 208 pages
  • Editeur : Vintage (5 avril 2011)
  • Langue : Anglais
  • ISBN-10: 0307476332
  • ISBN-13: 978-0307476333
  • Dimensions du produit: 1,4 x 14 x 21,6 cm
  • Moyenne des commentaires client : 5.0 étoiles sur 5  Voir tous les commentaires (1 commentaire client)
  • Classement des meilleures ventes d'Amazon: 110.380 en Livres anglais et étrangers (Voir les 100 premiers en Livres anglais et étrangers)
  •  Souhaitez-vous compléter ou améliorer les informations sur ce produit ? Ou faire modifier les images?


En savoir plus sur l'auteur

Découvrez des livres, informez-vous sur les écrivains, lisez des blogs d'auteurs et bien plus encore.

Dans ce livre (En savoir plus)
Parcourir les pages échantillon
Couverture | Copyright | Table des matières | Extrait | Index
Rechercher dans ce livre:

Commentaires en ligne 

4 étoiles
0
3 étoiles
0
2 étoiles
0
1 étoiles
0
5.0 étoiles sur 5
5.0 étoiles sur 5
Commentaires client les plus utiles
5.0 étoiles sur 5 Une analyse lucide et désespérante 22 juillet 2014
Format:Format Kindle|Achat vérifié
Le troisième opus de R. Reich est une analyse aussi profonde que celle des deux premiers opus. Simplement, la situation (notre situation) n'a pas arrêté de se dégrader, et n'est pas près de s'arrêter. A recommander chaudement, bien davantage que le bouquin de Piketty qui est déjà pas mal.
Avez-vous trouvé ce commentaire utile ?
Commentaires client les plus utiles sur Amazon.com (beta)
Amazon.com: 4.2 étoiles sur 5  237 commentaires
532 internautes sur 557 ont trouvé ce commentaire utile 
5.0 étoiles sur 5 An important book offering critical insight into the true cause of the economic crisis 22 septembre 2010
Par Robert Stryzinski - Publié sur Amazon.com
Format:Relié
AFTERSHOCK may well be the most important book written on the current economic crisis. I say this because it offers a critical insight that I have seen in very few other places: The fundamental cause of our problems is the relentless drive toward income concentration. The problem with concentrating income into the hands of a few people is that you take money from millions of people who would spend nearly all of it, and give it to a tiny number of people who can't and won't spend it -- but will instead save it, gamble with it, or invest it offshore. The end result is simply too few viable consumers to drive the economy.

Reich points out that income for American middle class families has been essentially stagnant or declining for over three decades. The middle class has coped with this in three basic ways: (1) Women have entered the workforce, (2) People worked longer hours, and, of course, (3) We all relied on debt (credit cards and home equity loans) rather than income to support our consumption. Those coping methods are now exhausted, and we are left in a position where average Americans simply do not have sufficient discretionary income to support a sustainable recovery. The great American consumer class -- which was the driving force behind our prosperity in the 1950s and 1960s -- has been largely decimated.

To his credit, Reich correctly identifies globalization and, especially, automation technology as primary forces behind declining middle class wages. At the same time, rather than enacting countervailing policies, the United States (beginning with Reagan) has gone in the exact opposite direction and adopted a conservative agenda that has actually accelerated the trend toward income concentration.

The one shortcoming of the book is that Reich -- not being a technologist -- fails to anticipate how advancing technology is likely to dramatically worsen the situation in the relatively near future. As someone who works in this area, I can tell you that the degree of progress we are soon likely to see in automation technologies is historically unprecedented.

To get a sense of what we may face in the future, I would strongly recommend that this book be read in conjunction with Aftershock: The Lights in the Tunnel: Automation, Accelerating Technology and the Economy of the Future. Both books offer an eerily similar analysis of the crisis -- both concluding that the problem is a dearth of viable consumers. Both books also propose very similar solutions: direct income supplementation. Reich proposes a negative income tax (which was supported by free-market icon Milton Friedman).

Anyone who wants to understand the current crisis and the danger we face in the future should read both "Aftershock" (for its emphasis on political and social implications) and "The Lights in the Tunnel" (for insight into how technology and globalization will continue to transform the economy -- and lead to an even more severe crisis, if we do not act ).
202 internautes sur 217 ont trouvé ce commentaire utile 
5.0 étoiles sur 5 "History does not repeat itself, but it sometimes rhymes" Mark Twain 24 septembre 2010
Par Johnny Na - Publié sur Amazon.com
Format:Relié
Every middle class American should read this book. Many observations about income disparities have been written up lately but Reich pulls the important points together in a powerful and accessible way.

Reich's main thesis is that the current transition the US economy is under is misunderstood. Many of the policy elite (Geithner, Volcker) have repeated the familiar claim that Americans are living beyond their means. Personally I don't discount that completely but Reich's insight goes much deeper and rings truer: "The problem was not that American spent beyond their means but that their means had not kept up with what the larger economy could and should have been able to provide them."

"We cannot have a sustained recovery until we address it. ... Until this transformation is made, our economy will continue to experience phantom recoveries and speculative bubbles, each more distressing than the one before."

Anyone looking at the unemployment data since WWII has to wonder why the unemployment component of the last three recessions is so prolonged. Instead of a sharp trend up, there are long slopes of delayed returns to peak employment. (Google "calculated risk blog" and look at Dec. 2010 articles.) I believe Reich has demonstrated the main culprit this. To be clear, he is not describing the detailed mechanics of what triggered the Great Recession. (Nouriel Roubini has a good book that I would recommend for more on the financial fraud, leverage and credit risks involved - Crisis Economics: A Crash Course in the Future of Finance. ) But Reich is taking a long term view and exposes a dysfunctional trait of the US economy that no one can afford to ignore. It is this weakness that will delay the current recovery and continue to create greater risks in the future.

Reich draws the parallels between the Great Depression and the Great Recession, particularly the imbalance of wealth concentrated in fewer hands and middle class workers with less income to convert into consumer demand. One of the fascinating devices he found to do this was the writings of Marriner Eccles (Fed chair between '34 to '48):

"As mass production has to be accompanied by mass consumption, mass consumption, in turn, implies a distribution of wealth - not of existing wealth, but of wealth as it is currently produced - to provide men with buying power equal to the amount of goods and services offered by the nation's economic machinery. Instead of achieving that kind of distribution, a giant suction pump had by 1929-1930 drawn into a few hands an increasing portion of currently produced wealth. This served them as capital accumulations. But by taking purchasing power out of the hands of mass consumers, the savers denied to themselves the kind of effective demand for their products that would justify a reinvestment of their capital accumulations in new plants. In consequence as in a poker game where the chips were concentrated in fewer and fewer hands, the other fellows could stay in the game only by borrowing. When their credit ran out, the game stopped."

Reich also shares a couple of powerful and disturbing graphs that show how the middle class has been squeezed and also how since the late 70s, hourly wages have not only not kept up with the rise in productivity but have remained essentially flat.

Another driving theme Reich presents is the "basic bargain" and he evokes Henry Ford, the man that took mass production to new heights and paid his workers well:

"[Henry] Ford understood the basic enconomic bargain that lay at the heart of a modern, highly productive economy. Workers are also consumers. Their earnings are continuously recycled to buy the goods and services other workers produce. But if earnings are inadequate and this basic bargain is broken, an economy produces more goods and services than its people are capable of purchasing."

I was concerned early in the book that Reich would leave out some of the important complexities of the topic but he covered related finances, politics and even consumer/voter psychology in a succinct yet informative way. His summary of changes to the labor market in the last 30+ years was very good.

His ideas for correcting this were interesting if perhaps difficult to implement politically. My take away however was that this is a strong indicator of how bad he thinks the situation really is. Many Americans may be yearning to return to "normal". Reich is the first to thoroughly convince me that it is not going to happen.

This is a very quick read of 144 pages and is well worth the time.
127 internautes sur 141 ont trouvé ce commentaire utile 
4.0 étoiles sur 5 Redistributing the Wealth 23 septembre 2010
Par Victor A. Gallis - Publié sur Amazon.com
Format:Relié|Achat vérifié
In this concise and well reasoned book, Robert Reich shows that the origin of the "Great Recession" lay in the widening gap between the very rich and the middle class. In brief, middle class incomes, adjusted for inflation, have stagnated or even declined, while the very rich have accumulated a larger and larger share of the nation's wealth. The nation's wealth has indeed been redistributed: upward.

This created a structural problem in the economy, since middle class workers no longer can afford to buy the products and services they produce, and the very rich cannot possibly spend the vast amounts of money they accumulate. Businesses remain "profitable" by outsourcing jobs or replacing workers with technology; this compounds the middle class dilemma because many of the jobs they did are gone forever.

With a shrinking consumer base for the products they offer, businesses cannot justify expansion, and do not create jobs. The rich, looking for places to put the huge amounts of money they control, are attracted to speculation; new bubbles are inevitable. At the same time, great wealth translates into political power, making any useful change extremely difficult.

Since the problems are structural, they must be solved with structural changes, and Reich ends with a list of suggestions for the kinds of changes that could help direct more money and success to middle class Americans. Many readers will think his suggestions are politically unfeasible, and while he makes a valiant stab at optimism, it is clear that Reich is very much aware of the obstacles in the way.

Before things get better, it seems, they will have to get worse. Much worse.
39 internautes sur 44 ont trouvé ce commentaire utile 
4.0 étoiles sur 5 Well-reasoned analysis of our current catastrophe 24 septembre 2010
Par CrunchyCookie - Publié sur Amazon.com
Format:Relié
The "aftershock(s)" in the title refer to the waves of damage caused by the supposedly finished Great Recession -- shocks that Reich warns will be shaking us up for years to come, and are bound to become regular occurrences unless we fix this fundamentally imbalanced economy of ours.

Actually, this book isn't so much about the calamity of 2008 as much as an exploration of the slow, steady march that got us there. Expanding somewhat on his "Supercapitalism" book, Reich points out (and backs up with data) that nearly ALL of the benefits from economic expansion since the late 70s have gone straight to the top, especially the top 1% -- a group that went from earning 9% of total income to 23% (not to mention 36% of total current wealth) -- while earnings for everyone else hasn't budged one bit, which translates to a decline in relative terms. Thank Reagan for that one, who hacked the top-tier tax rate in half, and then the Bushes, who trimmed it further while introducing tax loopholes (i.e. letting people classify income as capital gains), which collectively dropped the effective rate for top dogs from about 92% in mid-century to 35% today (25% after the loopholes).

It's fun to watch Reich vividly show us the absurdity of the results, i.e. pointing out how in order for the CEO of Bank of America to successfully spend the $96,000,000 he made in 2006, he'd have to find $23,000 worth of crap to buy every waking hour -- a level that's not only past the point of boosting happiness, but beyond an amount that's even possible to spend. Basically, there are more than a few extra billions of dollars just sitting stagnant in the bank accounts of schmucks that didn't deserve it, wouldn't miss it, and couldn't even use it if they tried -- a colossal waste from society's perspective. Logically, Mr. Reich believes this waste will be our undoing, because those of us in the bottom three-quarters are becoming so piss poor that we losing the ability to even buy the stuff the economy produces anymore, which makes EVERYONE worse off (even the bourgeoisie, since they'll have fewer masses to buy their wares). And no, the millionaires & billionaires don't compensate with their own spending, because they pretty much already have everything they need.

After touching upon a number of related issues, he ends on an optimistic note as usual, pointing out that we've been wavering between massive inequality and shared prosperity every few decades for a while now, and he believes we have enough "common sense" to return to the latter state without too much unrest. I'd say the jury's still out on that one.

I guess my only reservation is that if you're a Reich regular, you've probably heard much of this before. For me, quite a bit of the content evoked memories from his past books or blog. But it's still a worthy read in any case, and the guy still writes a better book than Krugman or Dowd or Moore.

And familiarity notwithstanding, I walked away with one pretty cool blinding insight I hadn't known before: his point about the "three coping mechanisms" that the average household has been using over the past 30 years to compensate for dwindling wages:
1. pushing women into the workforce
2. making men work overtime
3. borrowing money from home values
Reich says we've exhausted all three and are now out of options, doomed to lower standards of living unless our employers start actually sharing the wealth a little. He's right.
33 internautes sur 38 ont trouvé ce commentaire utile 
5.0 étoiles sur 5 The Widening Income Gap and the Beleaguered Consumer 4 octobre 2010
Par Izaak VanGaalen - Publié sur Amazon.com
Format:Relié
The defining statistic of this book is the fact that by 2007 the top 1 percent of America's earners garnered 23 percent of the nation's income. It hasn't been that high since 1928 which of course was right before the Great Depression. Robert Reich thinks that this is one of the reasons we are now in the Great Recession. The recovery, if and when it starts, will be very weak since the middle class has not gained any real buying power for the last 30 years.

Consumers constitute 70 percent of all economic activity in the United States, and if they are no longer employed or overburdened with debt they can no longer be the engine of growth that drives the economy. Many say that this figure is too high and that consumers should learn to live within their means. Reich, on the other hand, thinks their means should be increased.

There was time in American history that Reich refers to as the Great Prosperity, the years 1947-1975. (Read also Reich's book Supercapitalism: The Transformation of Business, Democracy, and Everyday Life (Vintage) for more on this period.) This was a time when income was more equally distributed. The top 1 percent received about 9 percent of the nation's income. The top marginal tax rate ranged from 70 to 90 percent.

During the Great Prosperity a single earner - usually male - could provide a middle class lifestyle for an average family. Since then wages have stagnated and families have found other ways to increase cashflow. Over the years women entered the workforce, people worked two or three jobs, and finally, during the last decade, they lived on credit cards and home equity to maintain middle class lifestyles. Now they have run out of sources of income.

Reich makes some suggestions that will have his critics up in arms. One of his proposals is a more progressive tax rate. In his plan the top 1 percent - those making over $400K anually - would pay a 55 percent marginal rate. This would be a relatively mild increase compared to the era of Great Prosperity. The top 2 percent would pay a 50 percent marginal rate and the top 5 percent would pay about 40 percent.

On the other end of the spectrum, those earning less than $20k would be supplemented and the large middle class - those with incomes ranging from $50k to $160k would be paying anywhere from a 10 to 20 percent rate. He believes something of this magnitude needs to be done to get the economy growing again. But it won't happen in the current political climate.

Many say progressive taxation and redistributive income is unfair, or worse yet, confiscatory. The fact of the matter is all taxation is redistributive. Taxation is the price of civilized society - to borrow from Oliver Wendell Holmes.

The current Tea Party movement is doing the bidding of the super rich. They are terrified of the poor and, in their view, the undeserving ending up with some of their money. Unbeknownst to them, the better off the poor and the middle class are, the better off the super rich will also be. Reich's modest proposal will not only strengthen the economy, it will also strengthen our democracy.
Ces commentaires ont-ils été utiles ?   Dites-le-nous
Rechercher des commentaires
Rechercher uniquement parmi les commentaires portant sur ce produit

Discussions entre clients

Le forum concernant ce produit
Discussion Réponses Message le plus récent
Pas de discussions pour l'instant

Posez des questions, partagez votre opinion, gagnez en compréhension
Démarrer une nouvelle discussion
Thème:
Première publication:
Aller s'identifier
 

Rechercher parmi les discussions des clients
Rechercher dans toutes les discussions Amazon
   


Rechercher des articles similaires par rubrique


Commentaires

Souhaitez-vous compléter ou améliorer les informations sur ce produit ? Ou faire modifier les images?