General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region Forums"Why We Should Be Seething with Anger over Inequality" --THANKS "Common Dreams"
Why We Should Be Seething with Anger over Inequality
by Paul Buchheit
It was recently reported that Americans greatly underestimate the degree of inequality in our country. If we were given proper media coverage of the endless takeaway of our country's wealth by the super-rich, we would be infuriated. And we would be taking it personally.
Each of nine individuals (Gates, Buffett, 2 Kochs, 4 Waltons, Zuckerberg) made, on average, so much from his/her investments since January, 2013 that a median American worker would need a quarter of a million years to catch up. For the most part it was passive income, new wealth derived from the continuing productivity of America's workers.
Why We Should Take It Personally
First, because our productivity is rewarding a relatively few people. In addition, many of the top money-makers are damaging other American lives. The top nine include four people (Waltons) who pay their employees so little that we taxpayers have to pay almost $6,000 a year to support each one of the employees. And it includes two people (Kochs) who have polluted our air and water to enrich themselves while quietly funding organizations that threaten to dismantle what's left of our democracy.
Another personal issue: While the Forbes 400 made almost enough in one year to fund the entire safety net, they don't even have to pay taxes on their half-trillion dollars of investment gain until they cash in, which may be never.
On Average, Most of Us Got ONE DOLLAR for Every BILLION DOLLARS of New Wealth
A look at the numbers compiled by Us Against Greed shows how personal it really is. Out of that $5,350,000,000,000 ($5.35 trillion) made since the start of 2013, the bottom 80 percent of America took an average of less than $5,000 each. The richest 6 to 20 percent fared better, taking an average of about $65,000.
Now it begins to heat up. From that $5.35 trillion, the richest 2 to 5 percent took an average of about $343,000. The one-percenters need to be split up into the rich, the super-rich, and the filthy-rich:
--The more common members of the one-percent (1,068,000 families) made over $1,000,000 each ($1,068 billion total)
--The .1 percent (108,000 families) made about $4 million each ($480 billion total)
--The .01 percent made about $40 million each ($480 billion total)
The unimaginably rich Forbes 400 each took, on average, almost $1,500,000,000 ($1.5 billion) since January, 2013.
That brings us to the Final 9 (Gates, Buffett, 2 Kochs, 4 Waltons, Zuckerberg). Each of them has accumulated, on average, over $13,000,000,000 ($13 billion) since January 2013.
Getting Billions for Working Less
A big reason to get angry: Our country's wealth grew from $64 trillion to $80 trillion (a 25 percent increase!) in two years, reflecting the unprecedented surge in America's productivity and wealth over the past few years. But there was little if any new innovation or job creation by these big takers over the past two years. The simple fact that they were already incomprehensibly rich allowed them to sit back and collect more and more and more.
Mainstream Media: Incompetent or In Bed with Business
And thus a final reason to be incensed about inequality: The fact that the regular media doesn't properly inform the public about all this. That should be their job, to report on issues that have a great impact on our lives, instead of hushing up the perversity of redistributed national wealth. But apparently it's good business for the super-rich media owners to keep their viewers harmlessly underestimating the truth.
--------------------------
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License
http://www.commondreams.org/views/2014/10/13/why-we-should-be-seething-anger-over-inequality
SidDithers
(44,228 posts)Sitting out the election is a very bad option, and will only serve to elect Republicans. That seems to be OK with commondreams.
Sid
JustAnotherGen
(31,823 posts)SidDithers
(44,228 posts)wyldwolf
(43,867 posts)but when people demand proof of something, I like to deliver.
JustAnotherGen
(31,823 posts)rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)an election is ok with CommonDreams as you indicate. The article states that Latinos feel abandoned by the Democratic Party.
Lie to me once, shame on you. Lie to me five times, what do you expect us to do? Obama and the Democrats who supported and encouraged him have little credibility among Latino voters. Obama may have done more to suppress the Latino vote through broken promises than any hostile action taken by the Republicans."
The author of the article, Carmen Velasquez,
This has nothing to do with the OP other than an ad hominem attack of CommonDreams.
SidDithers
(44,228 posts)The OP's editorializing about commondreams opens the discussion up to comments about commondreams, as well as comments about the article.
All I did was point out that commondreams is also advocating sitting out the election.
The OP made the thread about commondreams. Not me.
Sid
whatchamacallit
(15,558 posts)Always so helpful, Sid.
SidDithers
(44,228 posts)with the wording in the thread title.
And now you guys complain when someone responds to the intent of the thread.
Too funny.
Sid
tkmorris
(11,138 posts)How about if anytime someone posted a link to an article at DU, no matter what the topic of the article or the quality of the piece, there was some crank who would post a link to somebody on DU claiming chemtrails caused autism in order to discredit it. I would imagine you would say, quite rightly, that one has nothing to do with the other, despite a vague commonality of source.
So what's the difference here? You aren't being objective about this.
RufusTFirefly
(8,812 posts)And, believe me, that's saying a lot.
By the way, your completely off-topic, deliberately designed-to-distract link is a repost from Politico.
I assume you'll be raising a similar ruckus each time an article from Politico is posted.
Didn't think so.
(Ironically, unlike a Common Dreams, which is funded by progressives, notorious shit-stirrer Politico has well-known Reaganite roots. It probably wasn't wise for CD to repost that article, but of course, that has absolutely nothing to do with the OP -- and, of course, you knew that.)
Rex
(65,616 posts)Ever think about dual-citizenship?
Rex
(65,616 posts)But whatever.
SidDithers
(44,228 posts)It's an automatic reaction now.
Sid
Rex
(65,616 posts)Our somewhat more level headed cousins (imo). We could use some of that in American politics where everything is either an outrage or soon to be one.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)Commondreams' mission is ... Is it a compilation of liberal thought to promote dialogue amongst liberals? Or, a compilation of liberal thought to promote a liberal course of action?
It seems if it's the former, the linked OP is completely appropriate; while in my view, the OP is completely wrong-headed and unwise, to be true to its mission, Commondreams must accept/publish all comers. However, if its mission is the latter, commondreams would have to make editorial decisions that, ultimately, reflects only the biases of the editor(s).
If its mission is the former, I would recommend that every OP contain a link to an "matched" (by level of sophistication of argument and readability), though contrary OP.
Our information base is expanded with conflicting information, making for better opinions.
Doctor_J
(36,392 posts)Liberal_Dog
(11,075 posts)Like you will be?
leftstreet
(36,108 posts)This article hits the nail on the head despite the fact that some posters seem to have a nit to pick with some other article posted on the Common Dreams site.
WillyT
(72,631 posts)valerief
(53,235 posts)Rex
(65,616 posts)Sad that anyone would still believe Ronny Raygun was a great POTUS.
valerief
(53,235 posts)Rex
(65,616 posts)Reagan had Sununu's hand up his butt, Bush Sr. had the CIAs (lots of hands) and Bush Jr. had Cheney's up his rear!
KoKo
(84,711 posts)It was a clever "Sound Byte" though wasn't it.... Sadly.
valerief
(53,235 posts)I googled "pink cadillac 2014" and got a bunch of images.
KoKo
(84,711 posts)RufusTFirefly
(8,812 posts)As opposed to the Distractivist sub-thread.
Thanks for posting, KoKo!
Initech
(100,076 posts)We've graduated from being slaves to debt slaves. Once again the upper 1% just does not get it.
Tierra_y_Libertad
(50,414 posts)KoKo
(84,711 posts)...That some took the opportunity to READ the actual article..which is unusual these days on DU...when most go for "The Kill." It's about INEQUALITY FGS! Can't we All SEE THAT?
I worry that "Book Banning" will be next here for some on this site. But, that might be a "step too far" for even them. But, one never knows how far things can go with an Election for President Upcoming.
It's like the "NFL".........doesn't matter what they do (in Private Life)..BUT the RESULTS is what counts on the Field. Not to single out NFL but the Rest of our "Warriors At Home." And few sports teams are REMOVED....
We always hope for BETTER, though.