Why do socialists hate the poor?

Christianity Today, Sojourners, The Baptist News Global and other Christian media promote socialism as the cure for poverty. They assume their own moral superiority because they have good intentions, they claim. But none can give an example of a socialist country helping the poor. The record of socialism is one of punishing and impoverishing the poor in every case and the more socialist the country the poorer it became. In addition, the defunct Soviet Union murdered over 60 million of its own people as did communist China. 

Of course, those countries tried to honestly implement Marx's political nonsense to the fullest, being true believers. What about Europe? Western Europe didn't believe as much in Marx as others, so it implemented democrat socialism, a half-hearted attempt to follow his principles. The result was stagnation. The poor in the U.S. are as wealthy as the typical European. 

Media discovers K-shaped economy

 

A few economists and the media have discovered what they call the "K-shaped" economy.  According to the US Bank website, 

"A K-shaped economy describes an economic recovery where different groups or industries experience vastly different outcomes – some thrive and grow, while others struggle or decline. This term was intended to highlight the widening economic inequality during periods of recovery or downturn. It fits the saying, 'the rich get richer and the poor get poorer.'"

Capitalism celebrates 500th anniversary

This year the U.S. celebrates its 250th anniversary, which is great! But the birth of capitalism is even more significant because it changed the world far more than has the U.S. and this country would not exist as it is without the birth of capitalism. Capitalism lifted a starving world out of poverty to wealth impossible to imagine before. From prehistory until the 17th century, the entire planet was mired in frequent episodes of mass starvation due to famines. There was very little improvement in living standards for 10,000 years. Europeans were hardly better off than the Egyptians who built the pyramids. Capitalism ended that misery and lifted living standards for the first time in history. See the hockey stick graph of per capita GDP for an illustration. 

Is this capitalism?!!

The great economist Pierre Lemieux published the Substack post, "If this is Capitalism, Give Me Socialism," recently. He wrote that surveys revealed, "...more than 50% of voters aged 18 to 39 would like a democratic socialist candidate' to win the 2028 presidential election; and that three-fourths agree that 'Major Industries like health care, energy, and big tech should be nationalized.'” 

Dr. Lemieux notes that people are attracted to socialism because they think the current system in the U.S. is capitalism. But is it? 

When I was earning a degree in economics in the late 1980s, no respected economist referred to the U.S. as capitalist. At best, it was a mixed economy. So, how did it become capitalist? Socialists declared it so with the election of Reagan as President in 1980 because Reagan ended price controls on energy and transportation. The mainstream media, historians, the social sciences and humanities promote socialism. Socialists claimed that Reagan had unleashed wild west, no-holds-barred, totally unregulated, laissez-faire capitalism. But he hadn't. 

Eat the Rich! The Billionaire Tax

Jean-Jacques Rousseau wrote, "When the people shall have nothing more to eat, they will eat the rich." That's the thinking behind the many calls for a billionaire tax. Even the Wall Street Journal, the supposed fortress of capitalism, jumped on the wagon claiming "Billionaires' Low Taxes are Becoming a Problem for the Economy."

According to the Journal, billionaires often employ complex financial strategies to minimize their tax liabilities, resulting in tax rates significantly lower than those paid by average households. Yet, if that's true, why did the top 1% pay 46% of all income taxes? They paid twice as much in taxes as the bottom 90%. 

The Journal wrote that lower tax payments from the ultra-wealthy diminish government ability to fund public services such as education, infrastructure, and social programs. If true, then why are federal revenues, mostly income taxes, holding at 17% of GDP, the average since World War II? 

Gini in the bottle: how inequality measures fail

The standard measures of inequality don't measure what they claim to measure. 

Because socialists lost the economic debate with the collapse of the Soviet Union, they have used other means to advance socialism, such as the environment or critical theory. Another prong of attack is inequality. Clearly, they say, socialism can't make us richer, but it can reduce inequality. They use measures such as the Gini Coefficient, which provides a single numerical score (0 to 1) representing overall inequality, and percentile ratios like the Palma Ratio (top 10% vs. bottom 40%) and decile ratios (e.g., 90th percentile vs. 10th percentile), which focus on specific parts of the distribution. Other measures include the Theil index and the Lorenz curve, which illustrates income distribution.

Deporting immigrants won't cheapen housing

National Conservatives offer terrible economic policies, but their worst has to be the claim that deporting illegal immigrants will raise wages and reduce house prices. The Daily Signal recently published an article making that claim. Here is a sample: 

"In this regard, immigration enforcement achieves two macro objectives at once: It makes America safer while also attacking the systemic affordability crisis.... The evidence is already compelling. The early economic returns on immigration enforcement are nothing short of stunning...

Thankfully, under President Donald Trump, real wages have risen every single month of his presidency...These gains result largely from at least 2.5 million illegal aliens leaving America...

Masses of illegal aliens crowd out citizens in the housing market. According to Apartment List, since Trump took office, national rent prices for Americans have actually declined by 1.4%. CNBC called the current trend “one of the more renter-friendly periods in a decade."