This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Guest Post: Made In U.S.A.: Wealth Inequality
Submitted by Charles Hugh Smith from Of Two Minds
Made in U.S.A.: Wealth Inequality
Here's the Great Game: mask the nation's rising wealth inequality with Central State spending that keeps the debt-serfs passive--all funded by debt, of course.
While we may not make that much stuff in America any more, we can say that the nation's gigantic wealth inequality is totally Made in the U.S.A. Before we examine the data in some charts, I want to stipulate that great wealth in and of itself does not make a person an "enemy of the people" or threat to democracy. I confess to having generally lumped the top 1% of wealth holders into one category, something I have decided to stop doing, as this misses two critically important distinctions:
1. Not all wealth is created equally. Compare Steve Jobs, who is a billionaire for developing and selling "insanely great" mass-market technologies that people willingly buy because it enhances their lives, with a person who made his $1 billion by insider trading or misrepresenting the risk of his company's stock (basically the same thing). (If you need a hint here, think "Countrywide" or "Enron.")
Clearly, there is a distinction between those two fortunes: one created value, employment for thousands of people, and tremendous technological leverage for millions of ordinary people. The other enriched one crooked insider via trickery and deception.
2. Wealth destroys democracy and free markets when it buys the machinery of governance. Larry Ellison has made billions by developing and selling databases and business services. To the best of my knowledge, he spends his wealth on personal hobbies such as large homes and racing yachts. His lobbying efforts appear to be confined to yachting and the possible purchase of sports franchises. In other words, the political influence of his billions is localized and benign in terms of Federal policy decisions.
Compare that to the millions spent by the "too big to fail" banking industry to buy Congressional approval of their cartel's grip on the nation's throat: Buying Off Washington To Kill Financial "Reform".
Much of the debate about wealth inequality focuses on whether the super-wealthy are "paying their fair share" of the nation's taxes. If we refer to point 2 above, we see that if the super-wealthy are allowed to buy the machinery of governance, then they will never allow themselves to be taxed like regular tax donkeys.
In that sense, the debate over tax rates is pointless, because as long as the super-wealthy own the levers of Federal governance and regulation, then they will buy exclusions, loopholes, rebates, subsidies etc. which relieve them of whatever official tax rates have been passed for public consumption/propaganda purposes.
Let's take a look at wealth in America.
In Who Rules America?, Sociologist G. William Domhoff draws an important distinction between the net worth held by households in "marketable assets" such as homes and vehicles and "financial wealth." Homes and other tangible assets are, in Domhoff's words, "not as readily converted into cash and are more valuable to their owners for use purposes than they are for resale."
Financial wealth such as stocks, bonds and other securities are liquid and therefore easily converted to cash; these assets are what Domhoff describes as "non-home wealth" on his website Wealth, Income, and Power.
As of 2007, the bottom 80% of American households held a mere 7% of these financial assets, while the top 1% held 42.7%, the top 5% holds 72% and the top 10% held fully 83%.
According to the Fed flow of funds data, total assets of households and non-profits (a small slice of the pie) are $71.9 trillion, liabilities are $13.9 trillion and net worth--everything from jet skis to homes to stocks to bonds--is $58 trillion.
Here is a snapshot of total assets by category:
Pension funds and "other assets" include Treasury and corporate bonds, favored holdings of pension funds and the wealthy due to their relative safety and guaranteed yield.
Here is a snapshot of stock ownership:
No surprise there: the top 1% owns roughly 40% of all stocks, and the top 10% own 81%.
Wealth comes from earned and unearned (rent, dividends, etc.) income and capital appreciation, so it's no surprise that the income of the wealthiest segment has also far outpaced the lower 95%:
Meanwhile, the ratio of earned income to GDP is plummeting, which suggests that less of the national income is going to wages and salaries:
Thus it's no surprise that the median income has actually declined during the past decade of bogus debt-based "prosperity":
Here's a snapshot of just how debt-based that phony "prosperity" was:
Private borrowing declined as the home equity extraction ATM was closed, but the Federal government helpfully picked up the slack, borrowing and spending roughly $2 trillion a year so that total debt kept right on rising:
You have to wonder how much of our national wealth is the result of private consumption being transferred to the Federal ledger:
Put these charts together and you get the outlines of the Great Game: to keep the debt-serfs from rebelling, the Financial Elites have OK'd the funding of private spending by Federal debt. The Federal Reserve is a key player in the Game, of course, and its "job" is to suppress interest rates so the true costs of this skyrocketing Federal debt are masked, at least for awhile.
Beneath the happy surface of Federal transfers and spending funded by debt, earned incomes for the bottom 95% are falling and wealth is accumulating in the top 1%. The Federal Reserve's project of goosing stocks and bonds has greatly enriched the holders of those assets, while doing essentially nothing for the bottom 90% except increasing their government's debt load.
It's painfully obvious that the Federal government and the Fed are the handmaidens of the politically powerful Financial Elites. Why spend your own money on bribes, bread and circuses when you can arrange for the Central State to borrow the money? Why, indeed. "Austerity" is of course a modest reduction in the amount of money borrowed and spread around to keep the masses safely passive, but a few trillion trimmed here and there over a decade won't change the Great Game.
Frequent contributor B.C. summarized this reality quite cogently:
The top 1% of US households receive nearly as much income each year as the value of Germany's GDP; and they receive more income than all other nations' GDP (individually, not cumulatively) but the GDPs of Japan, China, and the US.
The financial wealth of the top 1% exceeds the value of the entire GDP of the EU (the world's largest GDP in aggregate).
Moreover, the top 1% could lose 90% of their financial wealth and still collectively have more wealth than all but each of the world's top eight GDPs (US, China, Japan, Germany, France, UK, Brazil, and Italy).
When one hears that wealth and income inequality is extreme in the US, I suspect many do not realize just how extreme it really is.
Peak Oil (falling net energy and available net exports), government "austerity", and the effects of population overshoot imply that wealth and income concentration will become even more extreme, affecting what remains of the professional middle class, who are largely dependent upon the ongoing growth of debt-money and government borrowing and spending.
Thank you, B.C. In other words, the top 15% better keep their eyes on the referee, if you know what I mean.
»
- 17525 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
If we were truly bloodthirsty, China would have been colonized post WWII along with Japan and we would have nuked Russia back to the stone age in 1946 and colonized Europe as well.
A democratic republic that operates from the locus of moral and ethical individuals who believe in and support the rights of their fellow citizens is the goal. Once the rule of law, the contract among these individuals is broken the appearence of a democracy is all that is left, and it may as well be a monarchy or a dictatorship because the elites have bought the government structure (Legislative, Judicial, Executive branches), the rest is theater.
However, it is only the perception of veracity that keeps the power of the mob at bay, and once the fog is broken all hell breaks loose. There may be too many sheep, or there may be many wolves acting like sheep until it is time to be a wolf.
What's with the WW II references? That was 65 years ago. That's more than 1.5 times the expected lifespan of a Pashtun man.
Things change. Look around you.
Yes, sure. Endless game. If the US has done that, they would have still not be bloodthristy because to be bloodthirsty, some other stuff should have been done.
Bloodthirsty people can always imagine new standards to deny their own blood thirst.
US citizenism carries a deep culture of death, bear with it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hii17sjSwfA
Lyrics, for those who don't care for the style:
http://www.azlyrics.com/lyrics/tool/vicarious.html
Democracy = top 1% convincing the other 50% to enslave the rest of 49%.
USA is a constitutional republic. Founders knew that majority of people are dumb to a point they hurt themselves. 250 years later, they are still right!
sign of a dying empire. We are engaging in a neo-colonialism. Just like all the world powers before US did....British Empire, French colonies, Roman empire, etc.
Easiest way to make money is to steal then convince others that you have earned it.
If money weren't synonymous with political power, it wouldn't matter much who had all the money.
But it is--so people with sufficient control of money are kings. Kings may be fine, but their existence was supposed to be prevented by the Constitution.
Epic fail.
2011-07-15 — weissratings.com
Weiss Ratings, an independent rating agency of U.S. financial institutions and sovereign debts, has downgraded the debt of the United States government from C to C-minus.
The C-minus rating for the U.S. reflects a continued deterioration in the weaknesses cited in the Weiss Ratings release of April 28, 2011, including heavy debt burdens, shaky international stability, and poor economic health.
Weiss Ratings senior financial analyst Gavin Magor commented: "Our downgrade today is not contingent on the outcome of the debt ceiling debate in Washington. It is driven exclusively by the numbers, which indicate that, in addition to a decline in the long-standing weaknesses we noted three months ago, the U.S. has already lost the golden halo that helped guarantee liquidity and acceptance of its government securities in global markets."
On the Weiss Ratings scale, which ranges from A (excellent) to E (very weak), a C-minus
http://weissratings.com/Login.aspx?a=r less
The right data would be to determine who lives paycheck to paycheck because they just getting by, and those that can't save because they have $150/mo cable subscriptions, $100/mo cell plans for the family, lots of booze, smokes and other stuff they could have put in the bank but instead mindlessly spent it on stuff the marketing machine told them they need. Personally I am all for helping those who are trying to learn to fish versus those who will simply get more money and waste it useless consumerism.
"Just getting by" is a term relative to a certain standard of living. Question is, who gets to decide, and why would you trust them when it involves redistributing stolen goods?
Wouldn't it be better to remove this insanity, and allow true charity (individuals freely donating their own wealth) to determine who is worthy of aid? This is one area where churches stand out as far better managers of charity than any government program. The Mormons, for example, have a success rate of "teaching people to fish," that makes any politically connected entity receiving gov funds look worthless in comparison.
I would enjoy competing with the mormons for land ownership a whole lot more if they were taxed the same... the church, generally spanning all religions and sects, is little more than a filthy institution and as corrupt as any other... altruism is a myth.
The only way churches work to actually help provide aid is to be grass roots and fiscally prudent... however, this has managed to be too difficult for the virtual entirety... given the allure of spending others' money and our personal inabilities to call church administrators theives...
It would be better to remove the insanity... what takes its place is anyone's guess... but moral hazard should be offered no refuge.
I see divide and conquer is still working. Getting pissed that the Jonses have better cell phones than you isn't the problem.
Geez, this thread looks like a HuffPo lovefest. For all you "hang the evil tax cheats" types, first, taxation is theft (regardless of the justification) and second, two wrongs don't make a right.
Hey Tyler, how about less CHS class warfare, and more Bang Dae-Ho?
+1
"taxation is theft (regardless of the justification)"
Theft. Ponder that word, redistributionists.
All this ranting about the good of society, and at bottom all you are doing is defending theft. You thugs make me sick.
All I want is a society that protects everyone from thieves like you, you envious, whining, poverty-pimping, passive-aggressive, control-freak, do-gooder, low-life bitchez!
Did you pay the owner of the butt for that picture or did you steal it?
Taxes are supposed to pay for public goods. The question should be which goods and at which quality/efficiency. Without some taxes/redistribution, you end up with royal family problems. cousins marrying each other ending up in genetic defects.
She gave it to me in the gift economy, dude.
Gee, I knew taxes and eugenics were related somehow. Thanks for elucidating.
Lads, we'll be lucky to end up like Brazil, but the reality is for those of us who happen to be of the Euro-American persuasion, well it is going to be very dicey at best and, frankly, we are going to need armas as the Brazilian Euro guy told me a few years back.
So it should surprise no one that Hyena Rodthem Clinton and Barak Insane Obama and Eric Paperbag Holder are all working very hard at this UN Treaty deal:
http://gunowners.org/a07152011.htm
Our enemies are serious people and this is a very serious issue.
"Our enemies are serious people and this is a very serious issue."
Right you are!
Game Set Match, Slam Dunk, all in one.
http://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2011/07/15/charles-krauthammer-accuses-press-accepting-every-leak-out-white-hous
That's funny.
Krauthammer's been reading Glenn Greenwald.
I was managing an American subsidiary of a successful large US Company in Mexico. It had been a financial turnaround for our team. Cash flow had accumulated in our bank in Mexico and corporate didn’t want the money repatriated to the US. Although we had already paid a 35% income tax to the Mexican government, we would have to pay an additional 30% exit tax to repatriate the money. In addition, we would have to pay high fees for the peso/dollar exchange, in order to make the transfer. The company wanted to expand our successful business and so we decided to keep the money in Mexican pesos to be used for further expansion. One morning, as my wife and I were on a trip driving on the highway, we heard a national message from the President of Mexico, Luis Echevarria, one of the most corrupt presidents in Mexican history. “It is a lie that we are going to devalue the peso,” he said.
Read more
https://lonerangersilver.wordpress.com/2011/06/20/living-through-a-curre...
@mayhem (for some reason the reply button wasn't working) So if I get mugged for $500, I shouldn't care because I still have what I need? If some financial institution uses HFT and server proximity to the exchanges to front run my trades, I shouldn't care because I still have what I need? If the Fed keeps taxing me via more QE, I shouldn't care because I have what I need? Excuse me if I don't share your live and let live attitude when it comes to the rapacious behavior of the ruling oligarchs.
exactly. live and let live as long as I'm born into wealth and you have to work all your life to get some crumbs.
If you really had "live and let live" rules, then poor stupid idiots with guns will kill all the rich stupid and smart and rape their daughters.
Not that straightforward.Saw my dad co-opted from union into management and me and siblings (as somewhat too smart for working class neighbourhood) bought off for jumping up to the middle class - really didn't work for me but for siblings yes.
exactly. live and let live as long as I'm born into wealth and you have to work all your life to get some crumbs.
If you really had "live and let live" rules, then poor stupid idiots with guns will kill all the rich stupid and smart and rape their daughters.
And what makes you think that's not going to be the rather immediate result of what's going on now?
In fact, would not one presume that these flash mobs terrorizing Chicago, Philly, Vegas, etc. are precursors to exactly that??
Flash mobs in Cities and Counties where firearms are suspiciously restricted. It would appear to be a precursor to one of two things - the collision of the flash mob and a force multiplier, which will be interesting, or the intersection of the flash mob and real wealth or power, in which case, there will be a pile of animal carcasses for the land fill, and FEMA camps will begin to be populated.
I think it's already a collision between a flash mob and a force multiplier, in that the hoodlums and thugs realize that most present security mechanisms can't handle more than individuals or pairs, so sending 10-15 people in quickly overwhelms the situation and they can take and do whatever they please.
When THAT intersects with real wealth/power, or the force multiplier becomes general riot numbers, then the carcasses fill the landfills (because there will be far too many bodies and far too quickly) and the FEMA camps open, yes....
FEMA camps are sheep farms. Be the force multiplier, it has the potential to be far more powerful than most realise, especially in urban settings.
Yes, the strategy will be used by criminals- but it can be used for the right reasons, too.
Sources, please?
I'm not doubting your info, I want to analyze it. Flash mob is a damn powerful concept, used correctly- but finding any decent news in this media blackout is a bitch.
exactly. live and let live as long as I'm born into wealth and you have to work all your life to get some crumbs.
If you really had "live and let live" rules, then poor stupid idiots with guns will kill all the rich stupid and smart and rape their daughters.
The problem is that we have hit a point where that's irrelevant.
If the threats are actualized (and they increasingly are in various urban centers of this country!), you're either going to get it from above or from below.
Plan accordingly.
Let's make certain that "small government" is not a cover up for corporate malfeasance. I worked for a company that stated on its intranet that it wanted to be a bank, absolutely has nothing to do with its core competency. Speaks volumes about cash sloshing around. Look up companies that have real estate holdings. Same thing.
Laissez-faire capitalism: McKinsey and Co. this week came out with a doozy: a worker who's been at your company for 7 years provides no more value than a worker who's been there for 1 year. I know that's wrong. However, that language appeals to CEOs, Boards of Directors, and bean counters in favor to six months contracts. Linguistics determine perception. When that pithy aphorism gets into the mainstream media vocabulary, it's hard to root out.
Delete
fukin weasels!
JW - So you'll never be as rich as you'd like, ok, get over it. There is a conversation gaining steam in this country over wealth that is separating communist from socialist from capitalist. It is not clear where you fit.
I retired when I was 25.. only to get bored and go back to work.. so I dont understand what you dont understand..
I believe in Democracy, I want the Constitution of the United States of America UPHELD! and I would like for everyone to pay their fair share.
as for the amount of money that I have or have spent, it has nothing to do with what is important.. I have in the past drawn a line to the Fact that someone would need a $100m to understand what being broke really is all about. But this went over everyone's head and had a terrible response.. which is not my goal, I would like to reach people and help bring them into the light. if they would only allow the sourced and sited facts in??????????????????????????
Yep LOP and C2 Media Malware made you rich, we in the know, know that.
http://trin69.en.ec21.com/company_info.jsp
Zero Point Ltd.
Multi-touch screens, transparent LCD screen, and related components.
icon Registration Date 2009/12/04 (Year/Month/Date)
icon Buyer / Seller in EC21 Buyer
icon Business Type Others
icon Year established 1999
icon Employees total 51 - 100
icon Annual revenue USD 5,000,001 - 10,000,000
Contact Information
icon Company Zero Point Ltd.
icon Address P.O. Box 344 Shalimar FL 32579 United States
icon Phone 1 - 850 - 420-2849
icon Homepage
icon Contact Jason Lucas
I didn't bother to read all the posts because my words seem to carry most importance right now...It's common sense! Do you think I want to be riding around in a Lamborghini when my fellow citizens are contemplating which flavor of A-Roni they want to lay out to the family tonight? I'm driving a Volkswagen these days...and proud of it. The want-to-be's can stand out like a sore orange Lambo for all I care. They are fools...history proves it.
hows that pheaton holding up for you? Mr. Slum alot?? LULZ!!! dont get mad V.I. I luv ya man! just kidding.. I kid, I kid!!
Ah, car lover..how else would you know?
It's a question of our moral values as voters. I can only say that morally I favor a taxing index that is bias to the middle class. The bigger the middle class, the better we ALL are. Does one live better on income after taxes of 100 million or 200 million? YES; We all see the diminishing returns effect. Now same question only it's 10 thousand or 20 thousand? Companies or individuals will want to stay in a country where the middle class is very large. The ultra-rich are not moving to the third world. It's all about standard of living of the people (jobs). The dirty little secret is the USA is self sufficient (yes that includes oil too). Greed (Walmart) sent the jobs over seas, and it was done with the medias help. Never for get "There's NO such thing as FREE". This is the work of the few, looking out for the few.
There's no such thing as FREEDOM in a socialist state.
This is an asinine statement on almost more levels that the word count of the statement. You clearly have limited understanding of freedom and liberty.
BTW, anyone with an avatar like that is desperately craving attention. It looks like your mom didn't breastfeed you, I feel sorry for you.
Edit: Looks like you took my advice and changed the avatar....good move
There is even less freedom in a capitalist society where rich own everything of value. You keep this up, rich old man like Murdoch will own your ass literally.
Don't Fucking Watch This Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jwpy8GMzf4I
+
JW.
is that a Joe Cocker cover band?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wPQz2ObqcFY
H.L. Mencken
Ah my oh my, how has it come about that any American has the right to determine how much is too much? And of course, we might also look at the fact that More Than fifty percent of the American population now receives food stamps and/or other benefits from the government. This has never before happened and it has come about only because the government decided on a course of genocide of the white culture and population. Without the need to be responsible for those one breeds (aka children), the overbreeding idiocracy decides to do what Oboma's communist plan intends: STEAL. Now suppose the overbreeding idiocracy had to actually work for their daily bread. What would the result be? Interesting questioin eh? Oboma has always premised all he is, all he does, and all he shall ever do, on redistribution through hatred: he must instill hatred of the achievers...he calls them millionaires but after today's taxes, to achieve a million dollars requires a lot of bare feet on the found at daybreak. Something the overbreeding idiocracy has an anathema to...as imagine, the creation, building, and continued nurturing of any business is sooo much work. Why bother though in the communist redistribution; galt it until until after the famine, which shall surely come as surely as it did during Mao's Great Leap Forward. Funny isn't it? When humans aren't rewarded for endeavor, they stop endeavoring...
Like Justice Stevens said, I can't define pornography but I know pornography when I see it.
I have a right just like I have a right to tell corporations they can't dump toxic waste into the ground water. I have the right to say that we all have to use and respect the country and culture we live in without killing or robbing each other, and if the authorities that protect this social contract will not do it because they have been corrupted by the power and wealth of the very few then it is the right and duty of the many to reform the system with revolution. It says so in the constitution. I get my rights from that sacred document without which you would have nothing:
When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. --That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. —Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain [George III] is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.
Nothing more need be said about the subject, it is right there in ink on paper, the rights are of the citizen (s) to abolish tyrrany and form a new government. Not just a right but a duty. And the magic of it is that you have an opinion and I have an opinion and lots of people care at varying levels of attention, but when the people suffer so much that they rise up to change the corrupt or unfair status quo it is not only legal and right but their duty as sacred as the right and duty to vote.
That is America, the country I fought for and would fight for again in spite of being a disabled vet. And I am sickenened in my heart to see the nation destroyed by internal enemies that I also pledged my life to defend the constitution and the people of the USA against all enemies foreign and domestic. You can laugh at people like me but I took that oath seriously and it did not have an expiration date on it.
In order to form a more perfect union, to insure the domestic welfare, one man one vote, bribery is illegal, pay your taxes and above all else serve a nation that needs you. I might not be much to you, but I know porn when I see it and when enough people like me see the same thing we can and will through off the shackles of our oppressors, we might not win but either way we will have fought for what is right.
Forget the cumulative totals. Keep your eye on the individual. Let's say we have 100 people and they own $1,000 between them. The top 1%, i.e. one guy has 42.7% or $427. The top 5% or 5 people own 72% or $720. This means that the next four own $293 between them or about $73 each. So numero uno has about 6 times the wealth of as the next four individuals. You can easily go the top 10 and see where persons 6-10 fall in the wealth scale. Can anyone tell me what the top 0.1% or 0.01% of the populace hold? I'm sure there's a whole bunch of folks in the "top 10%" who don't feel very wealthy. The fact that the other 90% are truly fucked is neither here nor there. The true "wealth" is in the top 0.1% or less. So please don't give me this top 1, 5, 10% or any of that crap. I'm probably in the top 10% category but i fed up being lumped with the likes of Buffett, Gates, Dimon, etc.
exactly.
http://www.stateofworkingamerica.org/pages/interactive#/?start=1996&end=...
Forget the cumulative totals. Keep your eye on the individual. Let's say we have 100 people and they own $1,000 between them. The top 1%, i.e. one guy has 42.7% or $427. The top 5% or 5 people own 72% or $720. This means that the next four own $293 between them or about $73 each. So numero uno has about 6 times the wealth of as the next four individuals. You can easily go the top 10 and see where persons 6-10 fall in the wealth scale. Can anyone tell me what the top 0.1% or 0.01% of the populace hold? I'm sure there's a whole bunch of folks in the "top 10%" who don't feel very wealthy. The fact that the other 90% are truly fucked is neither here nor there. The true "wealth" is in the top 0.1% or less. So please don't give me this top 1, 5, 10% or any of that crap. I'm probably in the top 10% category but i fed up being lumped with the likes of Buffett, Gates, Dimon, etc.
Forget the cumulative totals. Keep your eye on the individual. Let's say we have 100 people and they own $1,000 between them. The top 1%, i.e. one guy has 42.7% or $427. The top 5% or 5 people own 72% or $720. This means that the next four own $293 between them or about $73 each. So numero uno has about 6 times the wealth of as the next four individuals. You can easily go the top 10 and see where persons 6-10 fall in the wealth scale. Can anyone tell me what the top 0.1% or 0.01% of the populace hold? I'm sure there's a whole bunch of folks in the "top 10%" who don't feel very wealthy. The fact that the other 90% are truly fucked is neither here nor there. The true "wealth" is in the top 0.1% or less. So please don't give me this top 1, 5, 10% or any of that crap. I'm probably in the top 10% category but i fed up being lumped with the likes of Buffett, Gates, Dimon, etc.
Forget the cumulative totals. Keep your eye on the individual. Let's say we have 100 people and they own $1,000 between them. The top 1%, i.e. one guy has 42.7% or $427. The top 5% or 5 people own 72% or $720. This means that the next four own $293 between them or about $73 each. So numero uno has about 6 times the wealth of as the next four individuals. You can easily go the top 10 and see where persons 6-10 fall in the wealth scale. Can anyone tell me what the top 0.1% or 0.01% of the populace hold? I'm sure there's a whole bunch of folks in the "top 10%" who don't feel very wealthy. The fact that the other 90% are truly fucked is neither here nor there. The true "wealth" is in the top 0.1% or less. So please don't give me this top 1, 5, 10% or any of that crap. I'm probably in the top 10% category but i fed up being lumped with the likes of Buffett, Gates, Dimon, etc.
If the wealthy would just spend their wealth, any discussion of taxation would be pointless. But the rich don't spend: they accumulate wealth and force the rest into debt to get money. Since the amount of money in circulation continually constricts as wealthy accumulate ever larger quantities, debt is the only means that economy can expand and creates the illusion that money supply actually increases. If you ever constrain the growth of debt without "liberating" the horde of cash that was accumulated, you'll get monetary equivalent of 500-year drought. That's is to say that the economy is entering a state of entropy. "Fuc*king geniuses, can't figure out simple math problem."
The wealthy actually do spend a great deal of their wealth, which is why discussion of the structure of taxation is so important. They are motivated, by the tax code, to spend money on products which facilitate the indebtedness of of the masses. The entire tax code is structured to channel "investment", which isn't investment, into products which create debt (and more money) as opposed to tangible assets. The sales pitch on the products includes a healthy dose of wealth "accumulation", which is why when TBTF screws up the other side of the transaction equation- that Congress runs to bail out the wealthy. It is actually the same at the lower and middle ends of the income spectrum, there are tax incentives to individuals to take out home mortgages (and in the process supposedly proceed down the road to "accumulation"), which motivates people to borrow money to buy a house, which in turn creates more money.
Oh really? What an unpopular observation to be made on here. Ummm, well, what is happening when the currency is based on something like gold, that is something that can not be expanded like that? With fiat,'money printing' and stuff like that, hoarding can be counteracted. But with gold? How do gold currencies deal with that issue?
Ummm well.
Ahhh....pardon the "fat finger" chaps.....i'm not an HFT....too many MGDs i'm afraid.
does the fact that you are hammered off of Miller Genuine Headache mean you're in the bottom 80%?
Ask the Rothschilds and Rockefellers if money buys governance...!!!
In capitalist societies, money will buy you power.
In some other societies, power gets you money.
Any of you assholes play All American Jewish hockey?........face off; Bernank and Cantor.....
Awake yet?
I've reviewed my pamphlet on Jewish hockey...nothing.
Congratulations, CHS! You've successfully planted another "class warfare" bomb on ZH and got everyone's knickers in a twist debating which rules should be changed, and new 'laws' passed, so that they can get their 'fair' share of the booty.
FFS, wealth inequality was neither invented nor exaggerated in the USA. It is eternal and a natural consequence of every theory from 'survival of the fittest' to 'Das Kapital'. It was just as blatant in the Soviet Union as it is in New York; in the Roman Empire as in Communist China. It would be just as blatant in a Zeitgeist utopia as it will be in the New World Order. Get over it ... and get your hands out of my pocket!!
In that sense, the debate over tax rates is pointless, because as long as the super-wealthy own the levers of Federal governance and regulation, then they will buy exclusions, loopholes, rebates, subsidies etc. which relieve them of whatever official tax rates have been passed for public consumption/propaganda purposes.
If they are going to benefit from all these advantages then this goes beyond wealth inequality. I don't think many would have a problem with wealth inequality if they were just wealthy and didn't use that wealth to hijack the government and its agencies.
Government IS the problem, NOT the solution!
As soon as one sets up ANY central planning group to control/manipulate the rest, there will be nepotism, insider trading, cronyism, self-interest, lobbying, bribery, favours, jockeying, coups ... and an elite. It happens in the church, in soccer leagues, under communism, under fascism, under feudalism, under emperors, under monarchies, under tribal chieftains, in democracies, in republics............
Stop trying to make 'rules' that will be totally ignored by the very same anti-social individuals you are trying to control!
I can't argue with that. So there is no solution and this is the inevitable outcome? I know its true but its very hard to accept.
There is a solution, though the current collapse is certainly the inevitable outcome of the current statist system. It has been foreseen by many astute writers for a very long time.
Statism is dead! We need to give it a decent burial instead of continuing to paint lipstick and makeup on the corpse and propping it up against the coffin in an attempt to make it look alive!
The answer is to think and act locally. Local solutions to local problems and desires! Dismantle the federal central planners and revert to local government (or no government at all, for those--like me and a few others here--who prefer it).
Let those on the left coast have their welfare state, if they want to keep it. Let those on the right coast have their war machines and high taxes, if that's what they want. But let those who don't wish to be part of either also have their piece and peace. A nuke for all will seriously discourage imperial conquests (a MAD solution that was never available in any other period of history)---"A well-armed society is a very polite society".
Busybodies need to stop managing everybody else's life except their own! They don't have a 'perfect solution' and we should stop attempting to force fit a 'one size fits all' political system on everybody.
End the Feds!! (Federal Reserve & Fed.gov)
End the European 'Experiment'!! (EU & EUR)
De-fund the IMF!!
I like your attitude i-dog. But most of the people here rely on a fashion magazine for their political insight. I'm not really sure why Rolling Stone markets class warfare... I'm guessing it's a good way to lock down the 'Loaded-but-not-too-bright' niche. So, I'm saying you're working uphill here. : )
Agreed.
Moving away from the massive centralized government in Wash DC and push everything possible back to the States (as I think was originally contemplated) would be of significant help.
Many agree with this point of view me included, but getting to this point and remaining there requires eternal vigilance as Thomas Jefferson said. Personally I don't think the public has this kind of perseverance.
In practice, yes, government has been the problem.
In reality- the only thing that can oppose the elite is the focused power of the state. It sucks beyond anything that words can describe that we cannot count on the integrity of our representatives.
We don't need to redistribute anything, that is what merit and the markets are for- but we do need to enforce the laws we already have, and enforce them for everyone.
If poverty is defined on a relative basis, the ONLY way to eliminate it is for every one to have equal economic outcomes -- otherwise someone is always "poor" relative to someone else.
If you want to pursue equal wealth distribution on a global basis, everyone in the US (even the US poor) are going to have to significantly divest their assets.
No one wants to touch specifically answering - what is the "correct" distribution of wealth and who gets to decide how to re-distribute it?
It seems many here want government to actively re-distribute income via taxes -- more than they already do (as those who make 20% of total income pay 37% of all federal income taxes and those who make 47% of total income pay zero federal income taxes), but don't really say to what level and why that level is correct.
Instead lots of name calling (a hallmark of this site), rants about presidents and evil corporations, stoking class warfare, etc. We can't answer the most basic of questions - which produces precisely the federal government we have -- which is terrible, but may accurately reflect the level of thoughtfulness of the general public.
Einstein back in 1949 came to same conclusion:
"Private capital tends to become concentrated in few hands, partly because of competition among the capitalists, and partly because technological development and the increasing division of labor encourage the formation of larger units of production at the expense of smaller ones. The result of these developments is an oligarchy of private capital the enormous power of which cannot be effectively checked even by a democratically organized political society. This is true since the members of legislative bodies are selected by political parties, largely financed or otherwise influenced by private capitalists who, for all practical purposes, separate the electorate from the legislature. The consequence is that the representatives of the people do not in fact sufficiently protect the interests of the underprivileged sections of the population. Moreover, under existing conditions, private capitalists inevitably control, directly or indirectly, the main sources of information (press, radio, education). It is thus extremely difficult, and indeed in most cases quite impossible, for the individual citizen to come to objective conclusions and to make intelligent use of his political rights."
http://monthlyreview.org/2009/05/01/why-socialism
Nice link and quote....
I'm not so sure your presentation proved the points you wish to make, at least in my humble opinion.
For instance, the chart of earned income as a % of GDP simply underscores the sad fact that the "one worlders", globalists, such as former President Clinton have gotten their wish, and manufacturing jobs in our nation have moved overseas; our once-mighty manufacturing industry has been replaced instead by a financial product and intellectually based one instead. I suppose this is a case of, "be careful what you wish for", on a grand scale...
And indeed, this is a problem for average folks in this country that may not wish to invest the time and effort to educate themselves to take part in more intellectually based endeavors; but instead are only interested in finding a decent job, out of high school, and raising a family as people have done for many years. Sadly we've tried the "big labor" approach to having government ersatz mandate that companies pay employees whatever the union demands, and all that's done is accelerate businesses moving; either overseas, or to states that have "right to work" laws.
This is a problem that can't necessarily be solved by government through income redistribution, but only by the resolve of individual folks; when they're purchasing manufactured goods they should favor those made here so that they're not only fulfilling their immediate need but also helping employ one of their fellow citizens by extension. I know that's what I try to do whenever possible, but not to the extent that I "boycott" goods made by our trading partners...
Also, with all due respect, the graphs you provide that illustrate that wealthy Americans own most of the stocks, bonds, and other commercial financial instruments is really a "no brainer" as well. This reality is due to the vast amount of difference in the disposable wealth of these folks when compared to ordinary citizens. They're able to take the risk of purchasing such instruments, where ordinary folks are generally feeding themselves, paying for their home, and paying their taxes to the government...
Perhaps the real crime that has gone on here is that the companies offering these instruments were bailed out at all in 2008. The wealthy should have had to accept the effects of the risk concomitant with their choice of investments catching up with them, statistically speaking.
There's no need to inordinately punish folks in the upper brackets, as well as the many small businesses that file in these brackets as well, with additional burdens. That's both unfair and un-American. Our society, and Constitution, compels the government to protect equality of opportunity, and not equality of outcome.
Friend, if anything else, in this post you've actually made a very strong argument for a flat-tax system to replace the one we have today. One where the percentage paid would only be a function of income, and there would be no deductions save perhaps a personal exemption and ones for children, to ensure that legitimately poor folks and struggling families were spared additional tax burden, as well as a deduction for one's personal home mortgage interest. That's it...
That way all of the rich folks would have to pay on all of their investment income, interest-dividend-or otherwise, like we all have to on the interest we earn at the bank, for instance, and large corporations couldn't get away with paying zero tax.
What people percieve as "social inequities" shouldn't be leveled by government redistribution, but by ensure equality of opportunity for all to better themselves whenever possible. Taxes should be an instrument to pay the governments bills, instead of as a tool of social engineering.
Thanks for the thought-provoking article
My Regards
+100
Flat Tax, Bitchez.
Ironically, Americans have one truly "democratic" institution, American Idol. No money necessary involved and everybody can participate. Eliminating money from the election process is needed but probably ain't gonna happen until the current system collapses totally.
"why can't we all just be friends?" LOL/sarc. I got no answers to this conundrum...but glad to see there's an abundance of posters that have the "right" position. All's I know (think) is gubbmint's a big fucking waste & filled with parasites, and if the uber-rich would just 'fess up to their just-plain-dumb-fucking-luck instead of trying to con us with their "I'm so smart and work so hard" shit we'd all feel a lot better EDIT: a lot of us would.... certainly not all
The point is, when all the wealth is accrued by only one individual then once that individuals consumption needs are met all the factories and services will close, there is a limit to how many jet-skis one person needs.
That one person will only distribute so much wealth leaving everybody else with none, the economy dies and that one person gets poorer over time.
It is only by everybody having sufficient wealth to live by plus some discretionary spending will the economy operate properly (and a greater total wealth be created)
Stampedes are dangerous, steer clear! Mooooooooooooooooooooo
Well, I had fun for a while reading all the comments, then I looked back into reality.
#1 Who controls ICBMs in the USA
#2 Who controls ICBMs in the (former) USSR [note: spetsnatz will enforce this, whatever you might believe]
#3 Lol - the rest of this is total wank
There was a comment recently (god knows which thread) stating "...and Russian Mafia can afford the best ex-military" yadda yadda yadda. At this point, I knew the poster was bullshitting, because: they exist, and better yet - they're the "Oxford/Cambridge" educated set in your pussy world. Talk about Proust, and you'll have a brilliant and funny evening. The 'hit' table is the best place to drink in an evening / wedding / bar mitzvah, 'cause there's little politics, a lot of honesty and some very intelligent minds at work. If I show up at your door, chances are you did something to bring me there. Apart from that, very good guys (and a few (!!) women, although.. if you want to feel inadequate, go a few rounds there and learn a thing or two. On the other hand, if you satisfy the bid, you'll feel totally invulnerable to the wet, see through and pathetic plays of usual females. Lesson: at first it hurts the pride, then it makes it all the better xxx)
Oh - income inequality? Yes, of course - it is part of the game plan. I am highly amused at the libertarians trying to justify it through ideology. Newsflash, you fucking sheep: All. Costed. In.
But sure - keep trollin the intarweb, things are gonna change! (lol.. wut?)
anyone else feel like this thread full of idiots who don't even understand the problem?
I'm close to giving up on my species.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7KPEJNGAlqw&NR=1
Based on this (#1461859) comment of yours from above, I'm not really sure what species you are...but you sure don't understand the problem!!
Much of these meandering monkeys that're against government need to realize that keeping government in check will not be the answer to our solutions; corporations and governments need to be kept in check.
What? Dismantle government, and then let corporations have the run of the place? Fuck that. Fuck that, fuck that, fuck that, FUCK THAT. You myopic fools that support that--you're nothing but corporate teat-sucking whores that'd trade one form of governance for another that issues a mere pittance as they violate you.
And that makes you just as bad--if not worse--than the spineless government ass-kissing types: you become submissive as long as you're paid for it.
You know, I kind of like trolling the conditioned little biped-apes that take offense to profanity. Why attach emotional response to words on a screen? People who are so easily influenced, well--aren't very well much of any type of material for a revolution, or change: they are sheep that are fit to be conditioned any which way their corporate and government handlers see fit.
And you must ask yourself: why is it that you take offense to profanity? What are the conditional standards you have set to be "offended" by it? Your own subjective interpretation of the letters? Because someone whom you've esteemed to be a person of authority and wisdom has decreed that profanity is bad?
With that, I'll say fuck you. Fuck all of you.
So long as we have a rediculous tax code, it should be sodomized. Sorry, that's just how it's going to be until we have a tax system that makes some sense.
For decades, the government has collected about 19% tax revenue from GDP, regardless of where the tax tables stood. So it begs the question; if the U.S. isn't going to get north of 20% in tax revs, why not just go to a flat tax and save the money we wast on the IRS? Simplistic, yes, but the point being that we fuck with the tax code and pay hundreds of billions in wasted dollars to have the likes of the IRS and hiring tax attorneys and CPS to find "loop holes" in the system. To me, it just seems like there's an easier (and cheaper) way.
Then the uber wealthy have to pay their "fair share" and the little guy gets to pitch in too.