If everything you said was actually true (in terms of what creates the most wealth among the general population, including the poor) then I would support your objectives. But I don't believe you are correct in your analysis of cause and effect. So I believe your statements can be argued with.
I certainly am nowhere near the top 1% in terms of income or wealth, nor are the overwhelming majority of persons who support Republican candidates. It is possible that Republicans are wrong about how to fix the economy, get people back to work (which is the most important thing that can be done to provide dignity), and make life better for everyone. It is also possible that the Democrats are wrong. For example, there are a couple of interesting things about taxes that come into play:
This could be interesting.
1) The US has the one of the highest (if not the highest) corporate tax rates of any developed country in the world. This is why many former former US companies are now based offshore (not talking about manufacturing, but corporate headquarters).
Otherwise known as corporate tax avoidance, which is certainly not a good thing.
My Conservative led government is reducing the corporate tax rate in the UK every year by 1% since they came to power, by the time we have another election our corporate tax rate will be the lowest of any major country in Europe - why would they do this, to attract more foreign business investment, which will create more jobs, which will more than pay for the loss of corporate tax via income tax. Remember this was a Conservative pledge should they have got into power, to reduce the corporation tax by 5% in their first term, that is not simply an "ideological tax" as some idiots claim, but one that will help growth, reduce the amount of unemployed and actually generate the UK government MORE tax revenues. I thank the USA that their corporation tax is so high, it will only help the UK
2) The amount of tax revenue the government receives is dependent on the amount of net income that people and companies make. The better off everyone is financially, the more taxes they pay to the government, and the more money that is available for social programs and the poor. John F Kennedy lowered tax rates during his presidency because he was told by liberal economists that it would increase economic growth, and more companies and people would make more money, and pay more in taxes, even with lower tax rates. That is exactly what happened. Tax rates were lowered, and total tax revenue for the US Treasury increased as a result of the economic growth that resulted. This has been well-documented and was not a coincidence.
The first sentence is seriously wrong. "Gross" is the amount of income before tax, "Net" is the amount that person takes home. The government is the difference there, the difference between Gross income and Net income is "Government Tax", therefore your sentence should read.
"The amount of tax revenue the government receives is dependent on the amount of GROSS income that people and companies make."
Anyway, moving on, one of the other things that the UK government is in the process of doing during its 5-year term is to increase the amount of money that someone can earn before they pay "income tax", this is an idea agreed to by the Conservatives, but is actually their junior coalition partners idea (Liberal Democrats), this is a good idea for 2-reasons.
a,) Everyone pays less tax, but specifically those on low incomes and part time workers benefit greatly, which it these troubled times is a very good thing as there is a much larger number of part-time workers currently than there has been for a long time - due to the worldwide economy.
b.) This encourages people to get a job rather than sitting around in-front of the TV living off of the dole, anyone who isn't working, but is claiming benefits is a burden on all of the working tax-payers, the decision to increase the amount of income before tax gets paid to £10,000 per year by the end of the governments 5-year term sounds like a lot, but I for one am happy about it those on higher incomes are the ones that wont be as they have to pay for it.
As far as JFK's lowering of tax rates to boost the economy, that is exactly what every Conservative government aims to do, whether the economy allows them to do so is another matter. Personally I believe that there needs to be more balance than there has been, the current UK government is getting there by cutting a few hundred thousand government workers, and making big cuts almost everywhere, but they are not giving the money to the people, they are giving it to our creditors, so that in the future we wont have a gigantic budget deficit.
Regarding what has worked in countries other than the US, no two countries are the same in terms of history, culture, immigration, etc, so I am not sure that all policies should be the same for all countries. I personally don't want to impose my ideas on the UK, EU, or anywhere else, since that is not of my business. I prefer to not be an imperialist and try to tell others what to do (unless it is a direct impact on US security such as in Afghanistan, etc, and even in that case there are limits on what we can tell them to do).
I agree entirely, and that is why the Eurozone is totally phuqt, there is a huge variation in the countries of the Eurozone, but they want there to be a single rulebook for everyone, and they want every country to have an economy like Germany's, well that obviously wont work, as time has proven.
But I best mention agian that I dont want to impose anything on the American people, I just want to see my cousins over the Atlantic do better for themselves.
Anyway I have to go out, so I will pick this up later.