Posted 3 years ago on July 29, 2012, 3:41 p.m. EST by brightonsage
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
Those who really oppose equality of opportunity and try to misrepresent those who support it as radicals who really want equality of outcome or lazy people getting a free ride are wrong.
In fact, equality of opportunity doesn't guarantee equal outcomes but drastic differences in outcomes results in a society that is not as good for either extreme as if the distribution is based on the marginal increase in productivity they provide.
The Nobel winning economist, Joseph Stiglitz has addressed the disparity in income very well. http://www.chathamhouse.org/sites/default/files/public/Meetings/Meeting%20Transcripts/290612stiglitz.pdf
Corporate Boards of Directors should be insisting on executive compensation based on real contributions to the health and strength of companies, rather than rigged, quarterly profits. The fallacy of getting more of what you tax less is shown by low property taxes. Does that produce more land?
Does lower taxes on derivatives produce more goods and services or more risk?
The alternative to equal pay for all, isn't a rigged system where some get three hundred times as much as the bottom employees for causing the failure of the company, losses for shareholders, loss of jobs for employees, stealing pension funds and bailouts larger for a single company than we have cumulatively spent on the social safety net for decades.
Less extreme policies for compensation and taxes actually work. They actually used to work here, as our history shows, Why not go back to what works? Conservatives? I hope we could make a change that will be better for everybody. Liberals? The data is there for all to see.