3 ms·

Your comment is severely lacking in numbers that would indicate market-friendly policies have been a "failure". > It is about the 1,5 million homeless children

Your comment is severely lacking in numbers that would indicate market-friendly policies have been a "failure". > It is about the 1,5 million homeless children in the USA How has this number changed over time, compared to previous time periods? > It is about the income inequality which has increased since the '70s in the USA How has the actual income of poor people changed in the same time period? > It is about tax avoidance in the USA Please explain how the statement "tax avoidance in the USA" proves market-friendly policies have been a "failure".

orwin 8y ago
> Please explain how the statement "tax avoidance in the USA" proves market-friendly policies have been a "failure". This one i can explain. Whether its ordo-liberalism, social liberalism or any kind of post-1929 liberalism, a market-friendly policy aim to brake cartels, monopolies and remove unfair advantages, and help new companies start even in an already competitive field. You can easily see how tax avoidance, easier to avoid for big, international, old companies is a failure of "market-friendly" policies. This is not the only point where those policies fail, but this one of the most obvious. Sadly i don't have any english papers on this, but even really old-school liberals (like the ones you can proably see on fox, although i don't know if they invite PhD or lobbyists there) are saying this is becoming an issue. Also income inequality should never be a problem. Wealth inequality, however, especially when more money is gained from wealth than from work, is. And its easy to fix: less tax on work income, more taxes on wealth/wealth income. There.
- antidesitter 8y ago
  I don't see how anything you said proves "tax avoidance" is a consequence of market-friendly policies. If anything, it's an indication the tax code should be streamlined and simplified, which itself would also be market-friendly.

orwin 8y ago

> Please explain how the statement "tax avoidance in the USA" proves market-friendly policies have been a "failure". This one i can explain. Whether its ordo-liberalism, social liberalism or any kind of post-1929 liberalism, a market-friendly policy aim to brake cartels, monopolies and remove unfair advantages, and help new companies start even in an already competitive field. You can easily see how tax avoidance, easier to avoid for big, international, old companies is a failure of "market-friendly" policies. This is not the only point where those policies fail, but this one of the most obvious. Sadly i don't have any english papers on this, but even really old-school liberals (like the ones you can proably see on fox, although i don't know if they invite PhD or lobbyists there) are saying this is becoming an issue. Also income inequality should never be a problem. Wealth inequality, however, especially when more money is gained from wealth than from work, is. And its easy to fix: less tax on work income, more taxes on wealth/wealth income. There.

antidesitter 8y ago
I don't see how anything you said proves "tax avoidance" is a consequence of market-friendly policies. If anything, it's an indication the tax code should be streamlined and simplified, which itself would also be market-friendly.