Display:
Not really, the middle class was born in a large chunk by productivity increase. Not by confiscatory taxes.

Yes it was, at least in France and the US, with the help of inflation and wars.

The Middle Class was built in the 50's and 60's when the top marginal rates were around 90%. Those targeted not incomes equivalent to 50-100 k€ (the top decile) but much higher incomes, essentially the top centile and even narrower tranches of income (something nowadays politicians dare not do). Associated with a higher Estate Tax, this made sure the share of the GDP going to the top percentile got much lower (from as high as 20 % of global income...), with a corresponding rise of the share of income going to the rest of society.

Un roi sans divertissement est un homme plein de misères

by linca (antonin POINT lucas AROBASE gmail.com) on Fri May 16th, 2008 at 08:24:14 AM EST
[ Parent ]
OK, if you count wars, then this may have played a role in Germany, too. But wealth destruction is not what made the middle class rich. Inflation is even bad for the middle class, as the rich often owned real estate and that stuff, which is relative inflation save, while the middle class stores much as money.
Germany is here as well special, because as most people rent instead of owning a house (and more so in the past), a large chuck of the middle class really owns mostly interest paying money.

Der Amerikaner ist die Orchidee unter den Menschen
Volker Pispers
by Martin (weiser.mensch(at)googlemail.com) on Fri May 16th, 2008 at 08:42:51 AM EST
[ Parent ]
There is no wealth destruction in what I am describing ; rather, wealth redistribution. The rise of the state as a large employer certainly helped the creation of the middle class, too : for example the number of secondary school teachers is much higher than used to be.

The very rich (those whose wealth got redistributed) usually own financial capital rather than real estate, too (At least in France). That is much more sensitive to inflation. The effect of renting wrt inflation also depends on the regulatory environment ; rents in the regulated 20's to 60's in France fell very, very low as their variation fell behind inflation.

Un roi sans divertissement est un homme plein de misères

by linca (antonin POINT lucas AROBASE gmail.com) on Fri May 16th, 2008 at 08:49:50 AM EST
[ Parent ]
High inflation leads to lower PE ratios. For those who never want to sell 'their' business, a phase of inflation is not that problematic. And Germany had a currency reform as well after WW I, not only after WW II. On industrialisation Germany was as well late, compared with UK.

I think stock markets have a much longer tradition in the US and France than in Germany. Here the traditional enterprise is personal business with low equity and a lot of credit. So the rich people in Germany are often large borrowers of money from the middle class (their workers), instead of creditors. In recent years there are increasingly people with lots of money, who have never been entrepreneurs, but I think that is really a newer development.

Der Amerikaner ist die Orchidee unter den Menschen
Volker Pispers

by Martin (weiser.mensch(at)googlemail.com) on Fri May 16th, 2008 at 09:19:54 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I'm ready to believe a lot of the equalisation of Germany happened straight after WWII, be it in the East or in the  West... It sounds much like a special case.

Un roi sans divertissement est un homme plein de misères
by linca (antonin POINT lucas AROBASE gmail.com) on Fri May 16th, 2008 at 09:31:56 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Yes, it probably is, but 'special' are in a way probably also the countries which had 40 years of communism, the ones like Ireland, which were long rather poor and then had exploding growth, the ones like Switzerland profiting from tax evasion of other countries,...
There maybe over 200 different countries in the world, which may have nearly as much different histories...

However, today even when taking more from the very rich is feasible, it would be an illusion to think one can help all the weaker people in the society without a large contribution of those who are just rich, but not the very rich.

Der Amerikaner ist die Orchidee unter den Menschen
Volker Pispers

by Martin (weiser.mensch(at)googlemail.com) on Fri May 16th, 2008 at 09:50:21 AM EST
[ Parent ]
However, even if two world wars and what followed them were the most effective in reducing the power of the old upper class, I do think that you underplay the role of redistribution, and that during Bismarck, the Social Democrat Weimar times, and (lest we formget) the Nazis, too.

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.
by DoDo on Sun May 18th, 2008 at 11:17:19 AM EST
[ Parent ]
The point of destroying the upper upper class, of impoverishing it through heavy taxation, was to neutralize a center of power that existed outside of democratic institutions, and unaccountable to no one, playing for itself and itself alone.

The benefit is a much lower cost of governance as you don't have to fight teeth and nails for every itsy-bitty reform against skewed, bought and paid media, politicians and opinion makers. Then, it becomes much easier to create single-payer health care systems, public corporations to develop infrastructures, universal retirement insurance, etc.

by Francois in Paris on Fri May 16th, 2008 at 11:14:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]
... decade, from 36-45, and was quite obviously based on government policies, both income redistribution policies and policies supporting rights to organize labor unions which, if not at parity with the rights to organize financial capital unions (aka commercial corporations), were at least close enough to allow them to exercise substantial political and economic leverage.


I've been accused of being a Marxist, yet while Harpo's my favourite, it's Groucho I'm always quoting. Odd, that.
by BruceMcF (agila61 at netscape dot net) on Fri May 16th, 2008 at 02:19:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]
hm, i thought it was mostly the gi.bill....and the fact that resource wise america hadn't tapped out their own oil yet.

what were gas prices then, 5c a gallon?

~"When an inner situation is not made conscious, it appears outside as fate." Karl Jung~

by melo (melometa4(at)gmail.com) on Sun May 18th, 2008 at 07:08:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]
and the fact that resource wise america hadn't tapped out their own oil yet.

what were gas prices then, 5c a gallon?

First part true, there were even strict tariffs on oil imports. Second part not so much - in current dollars gas was in the $2.00-$2.50 range for most of the period between WWII and the first oil shock. Furthermore, mileage and salaries were lower.

by MarekNYC on Sun May 18th, 2008 at 09:32:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:
Login
. Make a new account
. Reset password
Occasional Series