Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

KoKo

(84,711 posts)
Mon Oct 13, 2014, 10:18 AM Oct 2014

"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
34 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
"Why We Should Be Seething with Anger over Inequality" --THANKS "Common Dreams" (Original Post) KoKo Oct 2014 OP
Common Dreams: "Maybe we should sit this election out." SidDithers Oct 2014 #1
Thanks for that link Sid JustAnotherGen Oct 2014 #2
All credit to wyldwolf... SidDithers Oct 2014 #3
and people ain't too happy I found the link, either! wyldwolf Oct 2014 #4
And deliver you did! JustAnotherGen Oct 2014 #27
Can we spell "ad hominem"? The article you linked does not say that sitting out rhett o rick Oct 2014 #5
The OP made the thread about commondreams with their thread title... SidDithers Oct 2014 #9
So... discount this article then? whatchamacallit Oct 2014 #7
The OP made the thread about commondreams... SidDithers Oct 2014 #8
Sid, your argument is inane tkmorris Oct 2014 #13
Most pathetic guilt-by-association ad hominem I've seen on these boards in a while RufusTFirefly Oct 2014 #14
If only you could vote in our elections Sid. Rex Oct 2014 #15
... SidDithers Oct 2014 #16
I was being serious, you are so dedicated to our democracy. Rex Oct 2014 #17
Sorry. I've had "Canadian!!" Thrown at me too often... SidDithers Oct 2014 #20
NP man, I LOVE Canadians. Rex Oct 2014 #22
I wonder what ... 1StrongBlackMan Oct 2014 #19
Do you think the income distribution listed will change much, or at all, due to this year's vote? Doctor_J Oct 2014 #25
"Maybe We Should Sit This Election Out" Liberal_Dog Oct 2014 #32
DURec leftstreet Oct 2014 #6
K&R JEB Oct 2014 #10
K & R !!! WillyT Oct 2014 #11
But...but...welfare queens in pink Cadillacs. St. Ronnie told us! nt valerief Oct 2014 #12
And some still believe that crap, to this day! Rex Oct 2014 #18
I can't picture him without a hand up his butt moving his mouth. nt valerief Oct 2014 #21
Funny, I picture almost all GOP 'leaders' that way. Rex Oct 2014 #23
True...many still think this..But, I've not seen any Pink Cadillacs...in so long....... KoKo Oct 2014 #29
They're not extinct yet! valerief Oct 2014 #33
LOL's...Custom Order for the "Pimps?" KoKo Oct 2014 #34
K&R for the actual article (Whatta concept!) RufusTFirefly Oct 2014 #24
K&R blackspade Oct 2014 #26
In the 149 years that have passed since the Civil War... Initech Oct 2014 #28
K&R for the article and Common Dreams. Tierra_y_Libertad Oct 2014 #30
Thanks...I thought it was a Good Read... inspite of what went on before........ KoKo Oct 2014 #31

SidDithers

(44,228 posts)
1. Common Dreams: "Maybe we should sit this election out."
Mon Oct 13, 2014, 10:20 AM
Oct 2014
http://www.commondreams.org/views/2014/09/09/obama-broke-his-promise-latinos-maybe-we-should-sit-election-out

Sitting out the election is a very bad option, and will only serve to elect Republicans. That seems to be OK with commondreams.

Sid

wyldwolf

(43,867 posts)
4. and people ain't too happy I found the link, either!
Mon Oct 13, 2014, 11:25 AM
Oct 2014

but when people demand proof of something, I like to deliver.

 

rhett o rick

(55,981 posts)
5. Can we spell "ad hominem"? The article you linked does not say that sitting out
Mon Oct 13, 2014, 11:27 AM
Oct 2014

an election is ok with CommonDreams as you indicate. The article states that Latinos feel abandoned by the Democratic Party.

"This year, Obama promised us action on immigration at the end of spring. Then he promised movement after the summer recess, when federal lawmakers returned to Washington. Now, he promises to take up the issue after the November elections.

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,
"But maybe Latinos in places like Colorado, Florida, Arkansas and North Carolina — states with closely contested Senate or governor’s races — should sit this election out. Maybe only by paying a price at the polls will Democrats finally stop throwing us under the bus."

This has nothing to do with the OP other than an ad hominem attack of CommonDreams.

SidDithers

(44,228 posts)
9. The OP made the thread about commondreams with their thread title...
Mon Oct 13, 2014, 12:09 PM
Oct 2014
"Why We Should Be Seething with Anger over Inequality" --THANKS "Common Dreams"


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

SidDithers

(44,228 posts)
8. The OP made the thread about commondreams...
Mon Oct 13, 2014, 12:01 PM
Oct 2014

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)
13. Sid, your argument is inane
Mon Oct 13, 2014, 01:12 PM
Oct 2014

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)
14. Most pathetic guilt-by-association ad hominem I've seen on these boards in a while
Mon Oct 13, 2014, 01:12 PM
Oct 2014

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)
22. NP man, I LOVE Canadians.
Mon Oct 13, 2014, 01:30 PM
Oct 2014

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)
19. I wonder what ...
Mon Oct 13, 2014, 01:27 PM
Oct 2014

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)
25. Do you think the income distribution listed will change much, or at all, due to this year's vote?
Mon Oct 13, 2014, 01:57 PM
Oct 2014
that's why people stay home.
 

JEB

(4,748 posts)
10. K&R
Mon Oct 13, 2014, 12:16 PM
Oct 2014

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.

 

Rex

(65,616 posts)
18. And some still believe that crap, to this day!
Mon Oct 13, 2014, 01:25 PM
Oct 2014

Sad that anyone would still believe Ronny Raygun was a great POTUS.

 

Rex

(65,616 posts)
23. Funny, I picture almost all GOP 'leaders' that way.
Mon Oct 13, 2014, 01:33 PM
Oct 2014

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)
29. True...many still think this..But, I've not seen any Pink Cadillacs...in so long.......
Mon Oct 13, 2014, 07:31 PM
Oct 2014

It was a clever "Sound Byte" though wasn't it.... Sadly.

RufusTFirefly

(8,812 posts)
24. K&R for the actual article (Whatta concept!)
Mon Oct 13, 2014, 01:45 PM
Oct 2014

As opposed to the Distractivist sub-thread.

Thanks for posting, KoKo!

Initech

(100,068 posts)
28. In the 149 years that have passed since the Civil War...
Mon Oct 13, 2014, 05:15 PM
Oct 2014

We've graduated from being slaves to debt slaves. Once again the upper 1% just does not get it.

KoKo

(84,711 posts)
31. Thanks...I thought it was a Good Read... inspite of what went on before........
Mon Oct 13, 2014, 08:55 PM
Oct 2014
's

...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.



Latest Discussions»General Discussion»"Why We Should Be Se...