top of page
Search

Towards a proper distribution of public burdens

Updated: May 6



ree

As Alexander Hamilton wrote in Federalist No. 36, "Happy it is when the interest which the government has in the preservation of its own power, coincides with a proper distribution of public burdens, and tends to guard the least wealthy part of the community from oppression!" The facts today tell us that American socieity is far from this goal of a "proper distribution of public burdens" that Hamilton urged us to aim for. There can be no doubt that we today face a national crisis of income inequality.


While inequality has always existed, and will likely always exist in some form or another, it has reached crisis proportions over the last several decades which are not healthy for our country.  In 2019, for instance, 4 in 10 Americans had almost no savings and would not be able to handle an unexpected emergency that cost over $ 400. This number is far too high for a nation of such great wealth and resources.


Over the last several decades we have seen a very disproportionate shift in wealth. Those at the top have come to hold more and more of the income, while those at the middle and lower ends of the income spectrum have continued to lose wealth, not gain it.


  • In the 1950’s, the top 4% made as much as the bottom 35%.  In the 1970’s, the top 4% made as much as the bottom 38%. In 2017, the top 4% made as much as the bottom 57%. 

  • From 2000 to 2018, Middle class incomes have only increased at an annual rate of .3%. At the same time, the annual wealth for those at the top increased at a rate of 3.2%.

  • From 1970 to 2018, the share of income held by middle class families dropped from 62% to 43%. During this same time, the share of income held by upper class families increased from 29% to 48%. 


These numbers speak to a great disparity in wealth over time which is neither equitable nor just. There is simply no reason why all income classes should not be increasing their growth at relatively equivalent rates.


During this same time period, we have seen that the taxes for the topmost earners have gone down. Again, this makes no sense. In 1981, the highest tax rate was 70%.  In 1982, it was 50%. In 1987, the top tax rate was 38.5%, in 2018, it went down to 37%.  Similarly, the tax rates for capital gains, which is money made from investments and other forms of property gains, have also gone down.   In 1979, it was 35% for individuals and 30% for corporations.  In 1981, 20% for individuals and 28% for Corporations.  In 2003, it was 15% for individuals and 35% for Corporations.  Starting in 2018, it was 20% for individuals and 21% for Corporations. 


Does this seem like what Hamilton referred to as a "proper distribution of public burdens"?


While no one wants to pay more taxes, there seems to be something unjust and inequitable about this state of affairs. How can it be that those at the top continue to increase their wealth at exponential rates while the share of taxes they pay goes down? Why aren't those in the lower and middle classes seeing their share of income raise at similar rates? Why do we allow fewer and fewer Americas to accumulate more and more of the wealth? How can we justify this state of affairs when we know that the needs of government, as well as the cost of daily living, has continued to climb, having its greatest impact on the lower income earners?


The data shows middle and lower class Americans have been losing wealth for decades, while millionaires and billionaires have seen their wealth increase at expontential levels. This is a crisis which cannot be allowed to continue. In Federalist No. 15, Hamilton wrote that “experience…. is the oracle of wisdom", and urged people to look at their own experience and determine what needed to be done. We must do the same today. We look into our experience, apply the laws of common sense, and find a way to more properly balance and distribute the public burdens among us.


Sources

 
 
 

Comments

bottom of page