ShareThis Page

Telling facts

| Tuesday, March 11, 2014, 9:00 p.m.

Telling facts

The letter “Telling quotes” (Feb. 25) represents some fine cherry-picking from historical figures to support a view of the “trickle-down” theory of economics.

So here is a quote in response:“Some people continue to defend trickle-down theories, which assume that economic growth, encouraged by a free market, will (bring) about greater justice. ... This opinion, which has never been confirmed by the facts, expresses a crude and naive trust in the goodness of those wielding economic power”: Pope Francis.

But instead of “telling quotes,” how about some telling facts:

• America's top 1 percent have doubled their share of pre-tax income since the 1970s.

• Wages and salaries — the lifeline of the middle class — have shrunk from half of the gross domestic product to 42 percent.

• Forty-six million Americans now live in poverty.

• The U.S. now ranks next to Chile in income inequality.

The conservative economic philosophy that argues that allowing the wealthy to run their businesses unencumbered by regulation or fair taxation leads to more jobs and income for the rest of society should be put to rest. Sharing the wealth for the common good is not only a logical imperative, but a moral one as well. And government's role in assisting in the equitable distribution of a country's riches is a necessity and a hallmark of a truly civilized society.

Robert Jedrzejewski


TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.