Sorry, Jacoby, you can't cloak the ever-widening gap between the rich and every one else with your pretense that you somehow speak for the majority of Americans. You don't. You never have. And you never will. We don't hate the rich but we want them to pay their fair share. Which they don't. Period. And we want to be rewarded for our increased productivity which has done nothing for us as workers but done plenty to maximize profits for big corporations who can no longer even pretend they care about their workers. You just don't get it.

You mean the wealthy Americans don't have a problem with income inequality, Jeff. It was the Republicans who initiated the "class warfare" you right-wingers keep squealing about by giving 90% of a tax break to 2% of the population.

Unequal productivity will generate unequal wealth. Unequal opportunity will generate unequal wealth. Unequal luck will generate unequal wealth. Unequal family wealth will generate unequal wealth. Unequal networks of friends and colleagues will generate unequal wealth. Unequal moral fiber will generate unequal wealth. Unequal levels of greed will generate unequal wealth. Unequal education will generate unequal wealth. Unequal rules of play will generate unequal wealth. Unequal intelligence will generate unequal wealth. It is a complex system that determines financial outcome. And not all those who achieve great wealth deserve it - because there is no such thing as a self-made person.

Sorry Jeff, just saying it does not make it so. The same is true of the Faux New Network. Are you operating on the system of just repeating lies often enough people will begin to believe them? Surely you must not believe this nonsense you write. You're joking, right?

"There oughta be a law", that automatically redistributes everything. A federal government service truck distribution system (nationalize UPS?) collects all inequitable money, food, clothing, whatever and millions of trucks drop off an equal share to each person in America daily. no delays allowed. "There aughta be a law" that mandates free plastic surgery so we can all equally share movie star looks. It just ain't fair that that astro physics professor's brain runs rings around my little 'need a calculator to add" brain. We'll fix that too. All you redistribute the wealth liberals need to get out of your leather recliners and get your butts in gear and go make something of yourselves. There are so many more worthwhile things that you can do besides complain and grab other peoples hard earned money. Keep your minds busy with volunteer organizations that help those unfortunate people who are sick or unable to function. Do some good for your fellow man.

Well Jeff I will give you this much, wealth is indeed not theft. It, however can be immoral. It can also be unpatriotic and detrimental to society as a whole. Would one deny a successful business man his billion, I wouldn't. Would I deny him the right to 90% of the nations wealth, I certainly would. An extreme I know, but the point is that we do reach a point where income inequality is detrimental to the nation and to the societies survival. Our system creates winners and losers as well it should. However, when the balance of power and that is from whence wealth is created, not hard work, is driven out of balance by the political and legal system, the accumulation of wealth becomes immoral. Joe the Plumber, can't "get out of his leather recliner" and become wealthy because the oligarchical nature of the system prevents this from happening. I am constantly amused by those who comment expressing their belief in a "free enterprise" system that doesn't exist. Who act as if through their own will and determination they can beat the odds and become "wealthy". Well as a person who lives in comfort and has done from my perspective extremely well, I didn't beat the system by hard work, I beat it just as Mr. Romney, Chrysler Motors or any other big business does. I used the system and that has nothing to do with hard work and is not something I look upon proudly or ashamed of, it is the system Mr. Jacoby supports and it is a corrupt one. So no, wealth isn't theft but in America today much of it is immoral.

"...and decrying the harm caused when "the gap between those at the very, very top and everybody else keeps growing wider and wider and wider and wider."" Why the concern JJ? Angry rhetoric falls on deaf ears...unless the listeners recognize it as truth. Sam Adams could not have raised the rabble, if the rabble were content with their lot. You misunderstand the mood in America: people don't despise wealth, heck everyone wants to BE rich, they dispise a system that they see has been permanently tilted in favor or the ALREADY rich. They despise a system where sincere honest effort is not rewarded, and rapacious, exploitive self-interest is. /// That we come to this point is the failure of the right, and to a lesser extent the left, who mis-took the collapse of communism as the triuph of untempered capitalism, and they've lost the American revolution in our life-time. See with your eyes, not your dogma, growing economic disparity serves no one's long term interests.

Our society needs a healthily economy to thrive. Public institutions would not exist without the success of private companies. However, the point Mr. Jacoby misses is the people are rightly outraged when millionaires pay a lesser percentage in taxes than the poor do. If such system of taxation isn't theft, it's the next best best thing: economic repression

It is so funny how those who disagree with Jeff cannot refute his arguments, but just recite chapter and verse the cliche talking points of the left. The rich should pay their "fair share" in taxes, is the one that is the favorite. It is a downright silly argument, because it ignores the fact that the wealthy ALREADY pay the vast majority of income taxes in this country. The top 10% of wage earners pay something like 70% of all taxes. How much more would be a "fair share"? NEW PARAGRAPH: The driver of this narrative is the politics of envy. Democrats use it because they can use meaningless statistics to support it-like the tax rates on income versus capital gains. Utterly meaningless, because the wealthy pay so much more in taxes. But simple minded people fall prey to silly arguments, so it is very tempting for Democrat candidates like to use it. Thankfully, it rarely works

Some of us are not so much concerned about class envy as we are the social ramifications of income inequality. Writers such as Doran Acemoglu have looked at the historical effects of widening gaps. Doran was specifically looking at the ME but it could in the long run apply to the US also. If the gap between the rich and the rest of society reaches a visible and unsustainable distance, in other words, Richmond12 can't get there from here, then social upheaval can well be the resulting outcome. Now perhaps you and others on the right do not fear a social upheaval but I think you should as the targets of these populist reactions will be the wealthy. Better to compromise and view the society as a whole rather than merely view one's own self interest.

Because of the earned income tax credit, the bottom twenty percent of households are net recipients of cash from the IRS. The IRS is our new welfare department. At least now you have to work for your IRS "refund.". That's better than welfare checks for not working.

Well Mr. Jacoby can turn off the hot air machine. It's May for goodness sake. No one is arguing against people EARNING a lot of money. It is only when it does not create wealth for the nation as a whole and takes it from those toiling to bring services and products to everyday Americans. Ninety per cent of those on top got their fortune from their parents or distant forebears so the myth of entrepreneurship is just that, a myth. Their other problem is they control the pricing of what people need to use everyday and although it jacks up their coffers it does little for the rest of the population. Higher taxes on these extractors only partially helps make headway on those programs that many are dependent on because the hoarders won't pay them enough so they can afford it. So the solution is simple. If taxation is an anathema to those hanging onto their load of cash then they can start to invest the 1.7 to 2 trillion dollars in private businesses instead of instead of pasting it on the wall, like this extraordinary sale of "The Scream" selling for $120 MILLION DOLLARS. The money went from one overpaid individual to another and how many jobs were created in the process. The answer: very few. It is time for those who have abused their cash holdings, not their wealth(the products of human work), by overpricing objects instead of putting the medium of exchange into human endeavors. Yes maybe they'll lose a few million bucks here and there but that money will have flowed to people who will spend it and they will be no worse off and probably eventually richer for their thoughtfulness. Time is on their side. By investing in our most precious resource, labor, eventually their patriotic contribution will pay off. However their impatience calls for immediate results even though they have the time to wait for a return on investment. Not having this confidence questions their citizenship by doubting the ability of the workforce to provide goods and services that will increase the wealth of the nation. Their actions actually suggest the opposite, namely, those without proper compensation but helped to make their pile bigger, will get powerful enough to make them penniless. What a ridiculous scenario. Sorry but most of us do not play by the same rulebook as these wealthy accumulators of dollars and just would like a decent wage to enjoy some of the comforts made by their hands and minds. We really do not want to be dependent on government to lead a meaningful life. It looks like these government hating people are producing just the opposite by their actions. More government will be necessary to offset the lack of productive investments and proper wages. So here are the real SOCIALISTS who are working to defeat real achievement in the market place and replacing it with unwise speculation and then creating a cadre of citizens who need government programs to survive. It is also responsible in large part for our debt along with misg

Let's refute: What Obama and 'the left' are focusing on in regards to taxes is the top 1%($375/400,000 per yr.) to some extent, but really the focus is on the top 0.1% who've reaped the benefits of 'trickle nowhere' economics of the last 30+ years. The top 1.1%- 3% probably would see a slight haircut, but below $250,000/yr. No... not happening. And as for "The top 10%{paying] 70% of all taxes", that's one of those rather "meaningless" statistics you're referring to: As we tilted the tax system, starting in the 1980s under Ronnie Reagan, towards the wealthy 'job creators' and these 'job creators' turned out to be better at saving/investing their tax savings than creating jobs, yes, they own more of the country's wealth and get to pay more of the taxes.

What would we all do if we didn't have JJ to tell us how we feel about the economy and national politics? Glad to see you speaking for all Americans again this morning Jeff. (eye roll) I especially like how you get right to work by making a comparison between Obama and John Edwards. Nice. I seem to recall that Mr. Edwards has been in the news of late. What a great time to try and paint Obama with a little patina of infidelity and fraud. Nice work. What I find especially "rich" is after being told how I think, Jacoby's points are all proven because we all don't "hate" the rich. We love America because of its inherent legal and political equality. Wow. As if the well-to-do can't buy justice and politicians can't be bought. Is this column satire? But it's all about extremes right? Well, maybe not. Even Adam Smith, who believed that a free market would benefit the masses through an "invisible hand" warned that the interest of manufacturers and merchants "...in any particular branch of trade or manufactures, is always in some respects different from, and even opposite to, that of the public." Yeah, that sums it up pretty well. The interests of the rich are to advance the interests of the rich. If there is any benefit to the rest of us it's purely coincidental. It's not even trickle-down. It's vacuum up. The rich are waving a giant vacuum over everyone else and vacuuming up the last remaining pennies. Propaganda like this is really very dishonest. I'll spare everyone a choice Chomsky quote here but for those interested read: Manufacturing Consent: the Political Economy of the Mass Media (1988). It's particularly applicable to this Jacoby rant. Moving on to Friedrich Hayek I would add that the problem with the United States right now is that we have inadequate aggregate demand for goods and services. This leads to high unemployment. That's where our economy doesn't fit with Hayek's notions. In a letter to Hayek, John Maynard Keynes said, "Your greatest danger is the probable practical failure of the application of your philosophy in the United States. No Jeff, we don't hate anyone. But we are getting tired of this line of yours that we are somehow "enriched" by the likes of Sam Walton.

Let's face it. Everyone wants to be wealthy. Be realistic. But the middle class is melting before our eyes. The middle class has sustained us for years with its jobs and taxes and the stability it gives to the economy as a whole. With a strong and vibrant, energetic middle class, the entire population benefits. No one is "milking" a gap. It's a fact that the gap is detrimental to progress for everyone. Extremely wealthy people have their riches, that's fine but there must be s a fair way for the rest of us having opportunities to get there some day. In the recent recession, Wall Street croaked the small investor, the 401k holder, and homeowners with mortgages that were worthless. Wall Street had the means to overcome its own problems. It also had the help of the U.S. government. I'm sure Mr. Jacoby appreciates that. Remember TARP? That was the U.S. taxpayer money at work. But will Congress appropriate money for our broken roads, our failing schools, and other fundamentals? Mr.Jacoby repeats all the Comatose Congress mantras. This Congress and its old age "leaders" have no ideas to present. It is an utter disgrace to our country, an embarrassment, really, and history will tell the details. This Congress with its Republican "leaders" is looking in a rear view mirror at a time that's not coming back. Look ahead and get ready for the future, because it's coming.

Mr Jacoby is the gift that keeps on giving. The trick of setting up a false premise and then beating it, however is a little tired. Sorry Mr Jacoby but a desire for fair tax policy does not equal a hate of wealth, the wealthy, or capitalism. It is possible, in fact polling shows it to be the case for most Americans, to be a proud Capitalist and to favor a fair, progressive income tax. Not only that but history shows that times of America's highest prosperity have coincided with very high top income tax rates. Of course this will not stop Mr Jacoby from tilting at the windmills he imagines to be black knights.

Jeff writes: "Most Americans don't hate the rich, or even the very rich, and they don't despise the economic system that makes great wealth possible." IMHO, he is incorrect. Buffet, Jobs, and Gates did not become wealthy in the same way that Madoff, Brown (John Nicholas), and Ponzi did. There is a vast difference between accumulating money exploiting and even killing people (think slavery, coal and diamond mines) than creating technology. There is a vast difference between exploiting and even killing the environment (think Love Canal and industrial pollutants.) No American "hates" the wealthy for their money. That's pure envy and without merit. They disdain the wealthy because there are indications that the money was accumulated illegally, immorally or criminally. And now that same wealth is being used to finance political candidates who will be beholden to them in times of regulations and revision. The same candidates usually outspend and outvote their opponents, rise in government standing, occupy seats of influence and perpetuate the system: money does not talk, it screams. Just fast-forward to Supreme Court justices an their decisions, inc. Bush vs. Gore and the Corporations As Individuals debacle.

Another Sunday, another weak Jeff Jacoby piece directed at people who aren't paying attention, but get pulled in by the catchy but misleading title of today's effort. I agree with Giermund, your placement of Obama with Edwards was brilliant, and so very subtle. If the journalism thing doesn't work out for you, there's always a place for you on Eric Fehrnstrom's team. I'm sure that he could find a job for man with your word-crafting skills.

Seriously, what is preventing a person from seeing that the American "middle class" has been under attack since 1980. All rational discourse on this subject has to understand that all eras of prosperity for our country have coincided with the upper income "earners" paying higher taxes. The Grover Norquist mentality has been, and continues to be, a Failure. Cutting taxes of the wealthy leads to nothing but making these same wealthy more wealthy. Nothing trickles down the economic ladder. Jobs are not created. This is the truth. It is not "pandering to the masses" to take this viewpoint. It is stating the facts!

Mr. Jacoby argues: "We are all free to rise as high as talent, education, and hard work will take us." Are we ALL free to rise in our country regardless of race and ethnicity, just to mention 2 group markers? If that were the case, how many black millonaires are in the US? Here's the data. According to the 2012 Forbes Billionaire List, Nigerian business magnate Aliko Dangote with a net worth of $11.2 billion is the richest Black person in the world. The other Black billionaires on the 2012 list are Nigeria's Mike Adenuga with $4.3 billion, South African gold magnate Patrice Motsepe with $2.7 billion, and American Oprah Winfrey at $2.7 billion. Yep, only one…

Positively...there is nothing wrong with being rich. I would love to be rich. I do not have the education or the general bent of mind to become rich it turns out. However, I have always worked for my "keep" more than one job at a time as well. I managed to acquire a job with benefits that included saving for retirement with a 401K, etc. Well, "somehow" my wealth and ability to care for myself has disappeared! What could it be? Could it be the greed and lack of constraints placed in the people whose greed makes them STUPID rich? Hmmmmmm? I am still working and I am well past retirement. I am taxed at a rate perhaps beyond what Mr Romney pays. My one tiny monthly pension from a former employer is taxed by the state I live in. But I suppose that's OK because it helps them pay the pensions of those who retired at 50 years old at close to the pay they used to work for. sigh.... So, before you think the the rest of us are just mad 'cause we aren't rich and therefore think rich people are somehow immoral, rethink it. Perhaps I have a leftover angry bone in my body from when I was laid off some years ago. The company was bought out and I began to have to pay taxes on the reimbursement I received for my receipted expenses...the company took the tax deduction. Nice. They then laid me off a few weeks before my bonus was due to me. AND, they hired a person half my age to replace me and paid her much less. VERY NICE!!! Now, tell me why people are pissed off??!!

Thanks, Jacoby, but sancimoniousness is not a cogent argument. There is nothing new under the sun, including pundits who cherry pick data to milk sentiment in favor of their argument. The reason the wealthy love capital gains is because the tax rate is lower. The Buffett rule, whatever its merits or faults, is an attempt to apply a tiered structure, as exist with income tax. People like Steve Forbes favor a flat tax for everything, while others favor more universal application of a 'progressive' rate that taxes the wealthier at a higher rate than those with lesser incomes. That we have a society dynamic enough to experiment with figuring out the best way to run itself is our greatest strength.

Because the rich benefit more from the system, a lot more, a whole lot more. They should pay a lot more to keep it going.

Richmond 12 says "The top 10% of wage earners pay something like 70% of all taxes." The top 10% control 90% of the wealth.

Richmond12 says "The top 10% of wage earners pay something like 70% of all taxes." This is 70% of FEDERAL INCOME tax. Picture changes with addition of FICA tax, sales tax, property tax etc.