Who Will Stand Up to the Superrich?

On last Sunday’s “60 Minutes,” Obama was already wobbling toward another “compromise” in which he does most of the compromising. It’s a measure of how far he’s off his game now that a leader who once had the audacity to speak at length on the red-hot subject of race doesn’t even make the most forceful case for his own long-held position on an issue where most Americans still agree with him. (Only 40 percent of those in the Nov. 2 exit poll approved of an extension of all Bush tax cuts.) The president’s argument against extending the cuts for the wealthiest has now been reduced to the dry accounting of what the cost would add to the federal deficit. As he put it to CBS’s Steve Kroft, “the question is — can we afford to borrow $700 billion?”

That’s a good question, all right, but it’s not the question. The bigger issue is whether the country can afford the systemic damage being done by the ever-growing income inequality between the wealthiest Americans and everyone else, whether poor, middle class or even rich. That burden is inflicted not just on the debt but on the very idea of America — our Horatio Alger faith in social mobility over plutocracy, our belief that our brand of can-do capitalism brings about innovation and growth, and our fundamental sense of fairness. Incredibly, the top 1 percent of Americans now have tax rates a third lower than the same top percentile had in 1970.

“How can hedge-fund managers who are pulling down billions sometimes pay a lower tax rate than do their secretaries?” ask the political scientists Jacob S. Hacker (of Yale) and Paul Pierson (University of California, Berkeley) in their deservedly lauded new book, “Winner-Take-All Politics.” If you want to cry real tears about the American dream — as opposed to the self-canonizing tears of John Boehner — read this book and weep. The authors’ answer to that question and others amounts to a devastating indictment of both parties.

Their ample empirical evidence, some of which I’m citing here, proves that America’s ever-widening income inequality was not an inevitable by-product of the modern megacorporation, or of globalization, or of the advent of the new tech-driven economy, or of a growing education gap. (Yes, the very rich often have fancy degrees, but so do those in many income levels below them.) Inequality is instead the result of specific policies, including tax policies, championed by Washington Democrats and Republicans alike as they conducted a bidding war for high-rolling donors in election after election.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/14/opinion/14rich.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&src=twrhp

it`s happened before and it will happen again.

It's a good article and it was hard to pick which 4 paragraphs to post.

Says it all

The rest of the world is shocked to see we have allowed such a thing. I have to give Obama credit on this one for admonishing the SCOTUS to their faces on account of their ruling that opened the floodgates even further.

The Sheep will vote in Massive Droves for their repuke masters

I'm starting to wonder if it's a massive waste of my time being involved in politics.

But look on the bright side--


At last we still have this MOTHER FUCKER TO MAKE FUN OF

that 'could' actually, at least begin, to reverse this trend of continual compromise and amelioration.

and serfs can do even less. Nobody has the courage to stand up to those people. We don't have a Teddy Roosevelt--we only have rich folks who want to be oppressors, not liberators.