House prices are up (still far above trendline) due to hangover of the bubble before the latest crash. Supply is not limited below need - at any given moment in the US there are more empty buildings than people without homes, and more houses that their owners want to sell than buyers with the money to reasonably and prudently buy. "Demand" and "supply" now is dominated by capital, not persons. etc. This is an example of a problem - an inefficiency, a market distortion, a stagnation of investment, an impoverishment of an entire economy - caused by too high a level of wealth and income inequality. The US is choking on it.
That's very ignorant. Many poor people work hard and long hours.
The ones getting paid to work create wealth. the ones who raise competent children create wealth. The ones who build, create works of art and craft, establish and contribute to community institutions, create wealth.
They can, if not curbed, in situations of great inequality. They have reaped almost all the net extra wealth created by the growth of productivity in the US since about 1982, for example.
And, true to form, that growth in productivity has slowed - for reasons mysterious to those who ignore the effects of inequality. It's not labor, it's not capital, it's "total factor productivity" - somehow the inputs of labor and capital are not getting the results of the past. It's almost as if Americans have forgotten or lost their former ability to run businesses - but that cannot be, since top executives are getting paid much more, which would indicate greater rather than lesser competence,
say those ignoring the effects of inequality.
Because it worked in the US for fifty years, has worked everywhere else it has been well tried, and helps to fix a very serious and immediately critical US problem that will result in disaster if not addressed.
No, you are very ignorant (and a broken record). All you have to say is that before Reagan's tax cuts and in the 50's just after WWII things were great and now all we have to do is to go back to those days and all will be fine.
As I recall you also have a problem with "compound interest". You don't have a grasp of economics.
Regarding housing, no one is having a problem selling their house unless they live in Detroit or somewhere with no jobs.
In general the economy is doing well. My comment about people doing the "dirty" jobs was not that everyone who is poor is lazy or not working hard. That's your slant. My point was that "dirty" jobs such as construction and plumbing pay pretty well.
It's mainly just those who rely on retail jobs that aren't going to easily afford a house in an area with a vibrant economy.
It can be done but it takes some effort and creativity. There is a widening gap between those who are doing OK and those who aren't. That's true enough. They rest of your comments are just ignorant.
You can't easily make a living washing dishes and buy a house and live in Seattle (for instance). If washing dishes is your permanent and life long job you don't need to live in Seattle. You can, if you can make things work out but it's not an economically rational decision.
The problem in Detroit, on the other hand, isn't capital. It's a bad economy. Your description of a tight real estate market as "hangover" is ridiculous.
Again, no one is going to be saving money and put it in the bank if there is no "compound interest". It's not good for the economy for people to have no savings, people aren't going to save via mutual funds with your ideas in charge, buying real estate probably isn't going to be a good idea with your ideas implemented either.
A lot has changed in the world since the 50's. Manufacturing isn't coming back to the U.S. Raising taxes on "the wealthy" isn't going to do anything positive for the economy over the long term either if done in a heavy handed manner.
"Fair taxation", sure. Would that mean that upper bracket taxes should go up, yes. Would I like to see an economy with your ideas in charge, no.
