Although I agree with this:
"Why should anyone in the US be guaranteed comfort when there are children begging in the street in Mexico or India?"
I also think the course of the argument goes the wrong direction when talking about the changing economy. I think technological progress is usually over-emphasized as a driving force and class warfare underestimated (Belloc's discussion of the factors involved in the creation of the industrial revolution in England is very good and explains various puzzles such as the relationship to Protestantism that had previously baffled me).
I also agree with this:
'As long as society's notion of a "normal" life includes working 9 to 5, watching sports and drinking beer on weekends, etc., then few will ever have the time to improve their lot in life.'
The problem here is in part how poorly integrated these activities are, and how this is used to control and keep down the masses.
'Every successful person I know works like a dog and has earned what they have, at great sacrifice (skipping parties and fun activities, working weekends, late nights, etc.). The fact to be remembered is that motivation is not evenly distributed in society and that many of the people struggling are simply not all that motivated. In fact, many teach their kids to disdain learning and education, etc.'
Agreed here too. However, the most successful people I know are ones who have this integrated with family time and so family, personal, and work time are not separate buckets but rather extremes, and most of life is spent doing all three to some extent. The doctor who reads stories to his kids while being on call in case of emergency is one example. So is "I am going to work on fixing bugs in this software while you do your homework, and if you have questions, I am right here, and can answer them" is another.
I don't know any small business owner who works less than 60 hrs per week. However, I don't know many small business owners who work more than 40 hrs a week away from family.
To live is to work. And we all work better when we are in charge of our work and work as free agents, not serfs of corporations.
BTW, there's a very dark side to welfare that is rarely discussed, and that is the use of welfare as a method of class warfare against the lower and middle classes. If Walmart can pay workers less and have them get Medicaid and Section 8 housing that means we are taxing mom-and-pop businesses to essentially subsidize a large corporation's operations. This thus acts to transfer wealth not from more fortunate families to less, but from middle income families to the very wealthy.
The answer is, in my view, to:
1) Tax lease income, encouraging sale over rent
2) Encourage self-employement as a means out of poverty. This means ensuring that what welfare benefits we offer don't go away just because someone starts a business, but rather get gradually phased out.
3) Corporate income tax should have a high marginal rate, and increases in corporate equity due to off-shore holdings should be taxed at full income tax rates.