This page is not a forum for general discussion about Income redistribution. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this redirect. You may wish to ask factual questions about Income redistribution at the Reference desk. |
This article was nominated for deletion on 2 November 2008. The result of the discussion was Nomination Withdrawn. |
Taxation Start‑class (inactive) | |||||||
|
Tsk. Wealth redistribution is the meta issue. income redistribution is only one element of wealth distribution. The recent redirect is in completely the wrong direction; the right article has been thrown away, the wrong (or at least subsidiary) has been retained. Bah. --Tagishsimon
I'm cleaning up some of the socialist bullshit in the 'proponents argue' paragraph. It looks like it was written by some 9th grader who had Jay Bennish as a teacher, and failed to notice that this article is titled 'Income redistribution', not 'Wealth redistribution'. -- Anonymous 69.194.38.246 00:59, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
I couldn't help but notice how one-sided and poorly written this article is. Could someone please work on making the article a little more neutral? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.106.104.4 (talk) 09:30, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
--Mike18xx 12:08, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
I think income redistribution and property redistribution – and also "wealth redistribution" – should be merged to an article redistribution as they were before, because they're all more or less the same purpose. Béka 11:08, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
I agree that the the various types of redistribution should be merged, since income redistribution, property redistribution and wealth redistribution has one aim soley, that is, to reduce income inequality among various income groups and reduce the incidence of proverty. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 200.50.85.8 (talk • contribs) 25 October 25, 2006.
Keep wealth and income separate. Indeed, clearly define and sharply distinguish these very different terms. Wealth is a stock variable and income a flow--both measured in very different units (wealth as an absolute level, often measured in dollars alone; income as a rate, a flow of dollars per unit of time, usually a year). In the bathtub model, wealth relates to the level of accumulated water in the tub--a function of income and expenditures, the rates it flows into, minus out of, the tub.
Also distinguish those components of income that flow from labor, capital, gifts, inheritances, etc.--and the non-monetary forms of both income and wealth, as Emerson does here:
"The first wealth is health."
The above can also "flow" into discussions of national budgets, deficits and surpluses, debt--as well as GDP (flows of goods and services--and goods and bads), net economic welfare, national wealth, etc.
Best,
Tom Foote
According to German scholar Olaf Gersemann, tranfers in Europe overwhelmingly go to the middle class: In Germany, the poorest 30% get 31.7% of the cash transfers. In Italy, they get only 20.5%
Other authors point out that the greatest recipients of redistribution are public sector workers, well above poor welfare recipients. I have not seen all the data, but it would be worthwhile to look at the budget and calculate how much the poorest actually receive. With the big military spending of the US budget, who knows how much redistribution actually goes to defense contractors? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Flix2000 (talk • contribs) 19 February 2007.
In "The state against blacks" Walter Williams proves with several case studies just that. Poor minority americans in the cities studied received less in transfers than they paid in taxes (local,state and federal).--82.211.83.9 13:30, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
After thinking about it for awhile, I think this article should be changed slightly and moved to "Wealth redistribution" to replace the (much worse) article that used to be there. Or, alternatively, it could be merged with "Property redistribution" and moved to "Redistribution (economics)". Thoughts?-- Thesocialistesq/M.Lesocialiste 01:08, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
Socialism is not about redistribution. Socialist believe in giving the government as much control over the economy. As I said on the wealth redistribution page I suspect this is a republican vandalism.YVNP (talk) 04:23, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Income redistribution/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.
==WP Tax Class==
Start class because needs a lot more references.EECavazos 03:43, 4 November 2007 (UTC) ==WP Tax Priority== Mid priority because a tax theory. Could go higher with further elaboration on its impact in other countries.EECavazos 03:44, 4 November 2007 (UTC) |
Last edited at 03:44, 4 November 2007 (UTC). Substituted at 18:50, 29 April 2016 (UTC)